Public Safety Committee on May 28th, 2026

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Let me address the issues around Bill C-22 and, if I may, take the opportunity to ask Senior Deputy Commissioner Larkin for some comments as well.

Bill C-22 is a very important piece of legislation. I want to acknowledge the co-operation that we've generally had with the opposition, both the Conservatives and the Bloc. I'm grateful that we have had a generally collaborative approach.

What is troubling right now is that, as we move forward on this bill, there is a fair amount of noise. Those concerns that are valid are being addressed, and I do believe, through the committee process, that we will address and strengthen the piece of legislation that's in front of you. It will ensure that we have a lawful access framework that works for law enforcement, and at the same time, we will have a system that protects privacy, extends privacy protections and ensures that there is no back door or illicit way for cybercriminals to have access to that data. We're very clear on that. I do appreciate the work that this committee has been doing.

With your permission, I'll ask the senior deputy commissioner to maybe highlight why Bill C-22 is so important.

[D/Commr Bryan Larkin]

Thank you, Minister.

It will come as no surprise to this committee that the RCMP and police leaders across the country are very supportive of Bill C-22, as well as the creation of a lawful access regime. We are the only Five Eyes country without a lawful access regime, and when you look at the larger G-20 consortium of countries, we're also the only country that is not a part of that.

For us, this is about victims. For us, this is about solving crime. We believe that there is a balance of opportunities here between public privacy and, quite frankly, allowing lawful investigations. I think that's the key. We're not asking for any unchecked police powers. We're asking for good governance, good democracy and a judicially authorized ability to investigate.

I want to highlight the notion of encryption. Of course, the world has changed. The reality is that we currently do have abilities to intercept and to deal with encryption. However, the reality is that technology is changing at a greater rate than we can keep up with legislative reform.

You've likely heard from some of my colleagues in policing, including Commissioner Carrique, that police leaders and police union executives have been trying to advance a lawful access framework since around 1996. We've come close multiple times. We believe it, in the current geopolitical climate, is a tool that we need. We have significant national security investigations. We have significant serious organized crime investigations where encryption is at the heart of stymying the prosecution and, quite frankly, the undercurrent of solving those crimes.

Again, it will come as no surprise to this committee that the RCMP, along with our policing partners and our colleagues from the service, are supportive of a regime that provides good governance and strong oversight to ensure that there is no unchecked...that puts the privacy of Canadian citizens but doesn't override those who commit the crimes—those individuals who perpetrate crimes against children, perpetrate drug trafficking, perpetrate illicit firearm trafficking.

The tools within Bill C-22 are required for us to be a modernized police community in Canada.

[Amandeep Sodhi, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

Thank you for your answer.

Minister, we heard from Peel Regional Police on Tuesday about the importance of Bill C-22, which you just reiterated, in completing their work.

Yesterday, the Leader of the Opposition stated that Bill C-22 will give the Liberal government sweeping surveillance powers over the information of Canadians. Would you like to comment on this statement?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park, ON]

Sure. It's categorically false, and that's why I think discussion on Bill C-22, especially amongst all of us as parliamentarians, needs to be done in a responsible manner, in a way that doesn't propagate misinformation.

As the senior deputy commissioner said, it's about supporting victims.

Peel Regional Police, in their press conference—and kudos to Chief Nishan Duraiappah, the deputy chief and the whole team—indicated that the arrest could have been made much sooner had a lawful access framework been available. It took a lot of time, especially in cross-border investigation, and involved a number of police jurisdictions. It took a long time for them to get the warrants and the production orders in order to fully investigate before the charges were made. In the meantime, the poor victims in Peel have been struggling with issues of extortion, which is something that I know you're very familiar with and that you've done great work on.

[Amandeep Sodhi, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

Thank you, MP Sodhi. That's all the time we have.

Minister, thank you for being here and for all the time your team spent preparing for this. Enjoy the rest of your day.

We'll suspend for a few moments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

We are resuming the meeting.

I want to welcome everyone back for the second hour of our committee meeting. I call the meeting back to order.

A number of senior officials are with us. I'll introduce them quickly.

From the Canada Border Services Agency, we welcome Aaron McCrorie, vice-president, intelligence and enforcement; and Ryan Pilgrim, vice-president and chief financial officer. From the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, we welcome Nicole Giles, deputy director, policy, and Jérome Laliberté, deputy director, administration. From the Correctional Service of Canada, we welcome Jay Pike, assistant commissioner, correctional operations and programs sector. From the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, we welcome Karine Paré, assistant deputy minister and chief financial officer, and John McKinley, comptroller and deputy chief financial officer. From the Parole Board of Canada, we welcome Claudine Legault, chief financial officer. From the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, we welcome Bryan Larkin, senior deputy commissioner, and Samantha Hazen, chief financial officer.

We'll move straight to questions from members.

Mr. Caputo, you have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Deputy Commissioner Larkin, my staff just sent me something here, so I do have to ask you about this. This is from a Global story posted May 21, 2026.

You were here for the minister's remarks, Deputy Commissioner, so you heard him when he said that the release of the MOU was the sole prerogative of the government. Now I'm reading a Global story by Sean Boynton from May 21, 2026. I haven't even read to the end of it yet. This is what it says in the first paragraph:

The RCMP says it won't release the full agreement it signed with China's Ministry of Public Security without Beijing agreeing to do so, despite demands from the federal Conservatives and NDP for answers on what it contains.

That was seven days ago. I know I'm putting you in a very difficult position here, Deputy Commissioner, in asking you about the RCMP's position on this. If we need to suspend for a few seconds so you can read the story, I'm happy to do that, as long as we extend because this is pretty important. We just had the minister tell us it's the government's prerogative, and it has nothing to do with China.

The story goes on to say:

“The RCMP will not unilaterally make public or share the contents of an MOU with a third party without the concurrence of the other party,” Percival said.

“As such, the RCMP is not releasing the contents of the MOU at this time.”

Clearly the RCMP's viewpoint is that it needs the agreement of a third party.

This is what the story says:

The statement added that such agreements are “a very common practice between national law enforcement agencies” seeking new or enhanced co-operation, and the RCMP has many MOUs in place with agencies around the world.

Then it goes on to say:

While the full text of many of those MOUs that were signed with China has been released, the one with China's Ministry of Public Security has not.

I wish I had seen this before, when we could have asked the minister about it.

I understand that you're probably in a terribly difficult position because you haven't seen this. Are you able to comment on this at all, Deputy Commissioner?

[D/Commr Bryan Larkin]

Thank you for the question. I can certainly speak to it from an RCMP perspective.

As this committee and you will be aware, Mr. Caputo, I have significant knowledge of that MOU and I'm happy to provide a larger context around the purpose and how the RCMP engages in MOUs with many different law enforcement agencies across the country.

It would be our organizational position, out of respect for our partnership with the Ministry of Public Security in China and with our partners, and in the approach to good collaboration and good work with another law enforcement agency, that it's generally not the RCMP's position to release MOUs without third party consent.

That said, the RCMP commissioner can, at the direction of the Minister of Public Safety, be directed to release MOUs, etc., in the purview of the government.

Our perspective on that article, although we're not likely to have seen that article but are obviously familiar with the media response and the response of many different journalists, is that the RCMP commissioner and I, as his delegate, would not have the authority and/or the ability to release it without consulting with our partners from the Ministry of Public Security in China.

Again, obviously we take ministerial direction, and that would be within the purview of the Government of Canada, but specifically for the RCMP commissioner, it would be our position that third party consent is appropriate.

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

Thank you. I have your point. Again, I put you on the spot with a tough question, so I appreciate you giving something very quickly.

Is there anything classified in the MOU? Is there anything intelligence-related in the MOU?

[D/Commr Bryan Larkin]

This is the renewal of an agreement, as the committee is aware. It really opens the door for collaboration. It's not legally binding. There are no enforceable conditions in it. It doesn't compel information sharing. It doesn't override any of our Canadian laws or policing approaches. It creates an opportunity around information sharing, particularly around precursors and fentanyl investigations, and how those investigations are conducted.

In short, in my opinion, there's nothing classified in there. It's a very standard memorandum of understanding, which we have with many different countries as we roll through. It's certainly one that creates the ability for the RCMP to work with a law enforcement agency on how we conduct mutual investigations and how we conduct information sharing. Those are the general thematics.

It also covers—

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

I'm sorry. I'm nearly out of time.

I'll leave you with this rhetorically. I don't understand why we would not release something that is as commonplace as this. You just described it as bland. Why would the government not release it?

I know you can't answer that, but this really [Technical difficulty—Editor].

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

[Technical difficulty—Editor]

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

[Technical difficulty—Editor]

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

I apologize for this interruption, everyone. We had to reboot the audio system and ensure that the interpreters are prepared to assist us again.

We were at the beginning of your time, Mr. Ramsay. Could you please start over? You have the floor for six minutes.

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

I have some questions for Mr. Pyke first, Ms. Legault, and then I'll come back to you. That will make more sense.

Mr. Pyke, during my visits to correctional facilities, I met many correctional program officers and probation officers. They're worried.

I would like to hear your comments on whether next year's budget will include more or less funding for, first, correctional programs, and second, probation officers, so they can do their jobs.

[Jay Pyke, Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs Sector, Correctional Service of Canada]

Thank you for your question.

We always have funding—I'm not being facetious—associated with programming and interventions across all sites. In terms of dedicated resource indicators, we have resource indicators based on the ratio of program officers to the offender population, and for correctional program officers, we have the same thing.

There is discussion, obviously, through the comprehensive expenditure review. In looking at the structure of correctional programming and parole overall, there will be some reductions to correctional program officers' positions that will coincide with a new model. We've had preliminary discussions with the union to this point on what that new model will look like.

Moving forward, there will be some reductions to the number of correctional program officers. There will be more support to take care of a lot of the administrative pieces that some of the correctional program officers are seized with right now. It's to allow them to do the actual work of delivering programs. We have had those discussions to this point with USJE, the union representing those members.

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

Well, I encourage you to do so, because, indeed, one of the complaints we often hear has to do with the increase in paperwork and the time spent drafting documents. If there were a way to reduce the time spent on administrative tasks, I think probation officers could do more of the work expected of them.

Ms. Legault, I'll turn back to you. I was saying that, when there is a parole decision, our colleagues across the floor often accuse the government of being behind that decision. I would like to hear your comments again so you can make it clear to our colleagues that the Parole Board of Canada is independent and impartial.

I would also like you to tell us whether the current budget will allow you to sustain the quality of your work—which I commend, by the way. Finally, I would like to know if your commissioners have identified any gaps in the assistance provided by probation officers to inform the board's work.

[Claudine Legault, Chief Financial Officer, Parole Board of Canada]

Thank you for the questions.

In terms of the funding allocated to officers, the budget we provide is to ensure that services are delivered and commissioners can render decisions. So, we protect their mandate in this way. The commissioners do indeed make independent decisions, so it is quasi-judicial. Everything related to an inmate is truly independent.

The main estimates specifically ensure the protection of their mandate. In the coming years, we will face constraints due to budget cuts. However, we are effectively ensuring that there are sufficient funds for decision-makers.

As to the relationship between probation officers and commissioners, personally, I am not aware of any complaints that may have been filed. I could relay your question and provide you with that information at a later date.

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

All right. I would appreciate that. Mainly, I'm interested in whether there's a general issue, since we're not talking about specific or individual cases, and whether the board members feel they can do their job fully.

Ms. Giles, we know that the types of threats facing Canada are on the rise, as are the intensity and frequency of those threats. I'd like to know whether you plan to review how you've allocated your funding for the next year. If so, can you tell us a little about how you determine the appropriate way of doing that?

[Nicole Giles, Deputy Director, Policy, Canadian Security Intelligence Service]

Thank you. That's a very good question.

To provide a more specific answer, I'm going to answer in English.

The increasing threats are materializing in terms of the increase in the volume, variety and velocity of the threats. That means we're having to combat and address a whole series of threats, both traditional ones when it comes to espionage or sabotage or foreign interference, and also new ones in terms of the types of ideologically motivated violent extremism we're seeing.

The other challenge we're facing is that technological advances are leading to the threats manifesting much faster than they previously did. This means the threat can move from idea to action much more rapidly, from somebody sitting at a keyboard moving from their ideation of the threat to their actual attempt to perpetrate the threat.

Where that leaves us, as Canada's Security Intelligence Service, is that based on the funding we receive, we are constantly reprioritizing to address the most urgent and serious threats facing Canada. We're regularly reallocating according to the threat environment. We're regularly reallocating in accordance with the work we're doing with our domestic and international partners. The reality is that we require more intelligence and more security intelligence than ever before, but we are sure that Canadians can expect that we will continue to protect them to the very best of our ability.

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

Thank you.

I have one last question, and it's for you, Mr. McCrorie.

Mr. Larkin, the deputy commissioner, told us that the RCMP was indeed on track to hire the 1,000 personnel in the next three years. I'd like to hear where the CBSA stands on its goal. Are you just as confident that you'll be able to hire the 1,000 CBSA personnel?

[Aaron McCrorie, Vice-President, Intelligence and Enforcement, Canada Border Services Agency]

Thank you for your question.

I too will answer in English because we're going to use numbers and it'll be better for me to say them in English.

Yes, I think we're on track—

[The Chair, Liberal, Jean-Yves Duclos]

I'm sorry. I was confused: I thought the time on my clock was decreasing, but it was increasing. I apologize for interrupting you rudely, but that's well over the time allocated for MP Ramsey.

Mrs. DeBellefeuille, you may go ahead for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Giles, can you tell me whether the integrated threat assessment centre is a specialized organization that falls under the administrative oversight of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, CSIS, and thus under the responsibility of the public safety department? Yes or no?