Debates of Nov. 3rd, 2022

Question No.772—

[Omar Alghabra, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, regarding part (a) of the question, all Canadian pilots, air traffic controllers and flight engineers require valid Transport Canada aviation medical certificates in order to exercise the privileges of their licenses, permits or ratings.

Different categories of aviation medical certificates are required for different types of aviation activities: category 1, commercial pilot; category 2, air traffic controller; category 3, private pilot; and category 4, student pilot, recreational pilot or glider pilot.

Transport Canada processes applications for category 1, category 2 and category 3 aviation medical certificates. These applications require applicants to undergo medical examinations by civil aviation medical examiners, who are physicians appointed to perform aviation medical examinations on behalf of the Minister of Transport.

Category 4 aviation medical certificates are generally submitted medical declarations directly to Transport Canada licensing for issuance of a category 4 medical certificate, without the need for a civil aviation medical examiner examination. The service delivery target for category 4 aviation medical certificates is 40 business days and there is no current backlog.

Transport Canada processes approximately 60,000 aviation medical certificate applications annually. Since March 2022, applications have increased from approximately 5,000 to 6,000 per month, due to increased aviation activity as the pandemic measures have eased.

Except for prioritizing some applications for the preservation of essential aviation services, including aviation training, the department manages category 1, 2 and 3 applications with the same service delivery target and in the same processing stream.

The service delivery target for new, uncomplicated aviation medical certificate applications is 40 business days after receipt by the department. The 40-business day service delivery target does not apply to incomplete or medically complex applications for which additional medical information is required. Applicants may be required to seek additional physician reports, tests or investigations within the provincial and territorial health care systems, where the provision of direct patient care may be prioritized over Transport Canada regulatory medicine requirements, thereby introducing delays.

With respect to part (b), throughout the pandemic, the department did not discontinue service delivery at any time and was a global aviation leader in putting measures into place to ensure the continued provision of aviation medical certificates.

However, despite the department’s uninterrupted operations, a backlog of applications did develop during the pandemic. Important factors that contributed to the backlog include pre-existing process inefficiencies in a paper-based system, delays in letter mail delivery and staff losses, including key physicians and administrative staff, that were challenging to replace in a labour environment in high demand for medical professionals. It is worth noting that the backlog is not distributed uniformly across Canada, with some regions experiencing very little or no backlog, and other regions experiencing greater backlog.

Although it is not possible to provide a definitive timeline for when the backlog will be eliminated, Transport Canada is working to identify and process applications that were delayed and has hired additional physicians and administrative staff to increase file processing capacity.

Furthermore, since the start of the pandemic, the department has undertaken major modernization efforts, including successful initiatives to streamline and digitize its processes. For instance, before the pandemic, fewer than 5% of applications were received digitally and, currently, more than 90% of applications are received digitally. This eliminates delays in the postal system and time-consuming paper handling by departmental staff.

With respect to the status of Transport Canada service delivery as of September 2022, for every 10 applicants, on average, seven out of 10, or 70%, receive immediate service delivery. These are medically uncomplicated renewal applicants whose existing medical certificates are renewed in-office by their civil aviation medical examiners. Two out of 10, or 20%, receive service delivery within 40 business days. These are complete and uncomplicated applications for new medical certificates, or uncomplicated renewal applications for medical certificates not eligible for civil aviation medical examiner renewal in-office. Finally, one out of 10, or 10%, receive service delivery beyond 40 business days. These include incomplete or medically complex applications for which additional medical information is required in order to complete the assessments. In some cases, these applicants may have disqualifying medical conditions, and their assessments may be delayed long term awaiting the resolution or stabilization of a medical condition, or renewal applications for medical certificates not eligible for civil aviation medical examiner renewal in-office.

Transport Canada continues to strive to provide timely aviation medical certification, with the majority of aviation medical certificate applicants currently receiving service within the 40-business day timeline.

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Speaker, if the government's response to Questions Nos. 766, 767, 771, 773 and 774 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Question No.766—

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

With regard to government measures related to the removal of unexploded explosive ordnance (UXO) in the Lac Saint-Pierre region: (a) which vendors have been awarded contracts related to the removal of UXO in the region since 2019; (b) what are the details of each contract in (a), including, for each, (i) the vendor, (ii) the value, (iii) the start and end dates, (iv) whether the contract was sole-sourced or awarded through a competitive bidding process, (v) the description of goods or services provided through contract; (c) for each contract in (b), how many UXOs in the region have actually been removed, broken down by year; (d) what are the projections related to the number of UXOs which will be removed by each vendor in (b), broken down by year between now and the end of the contract; (e) for each contract in (b), which was awarded through a competitive bidding process, how many vendors submitted bids; (f) does the government plan to award further contracts related to the UXO removal in the region, and, if so, what are the details of the plan; and (g) for each contract, what is the work schedule, broken down by month, including both work that has been completed to date and work that will be completed in the future?

(Return tabled)

Question No.767—

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

With regard to fines issued related to violations of the government's restrictions and measures put in place in response to COVID-19 (ArriveCAN, quarantine requirements, etc.): (a) what is the total (i) number, (ii) value, of fines issued each month since January 1, 2022; (b) what is the breakdown of the fines in (a) by (i) province or territory, (ii) type of offence or violation, (iii) entity which issued the fine, (iv) amount of fine, (v) point of entry (if applicable); and (c) of the fines in (a), what is the (i) number, (ii) value, of amounts which have actually been paid or collected?

(Return tabled)

Question No.771—

[John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest, NB]

With regard to fines issued by Transport Canada to Canadian Coast Guard ships and other vessels owned by the government, since 2016: what are the details of each instance, including (i) the date, (ii) the type of vessel, (iii) the summary of the incident or infraction, (iv) the location of the incident or infraction, (v) the amount of fine, (vi) who paid the fine and whether the fine was paid out of personal or public funds?

(Return tabled)

Question No.773—

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

With regard to the government's Net-Zero Challenge program: (a) what is the annual amount budgeted towards administering the program; (b) what is the breakdown of (a) by line item or type of expense; (c) what is the number of employees or full-time equivalents assigned to work on the program; and (d) what is the breakdown of (c) by employee classification level (AS-07, EX-01, etc.)?

(Return tabled)

Question No.774—

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

With regard to spending by Canadian Heritage on Canada Day festivities on Parliament Hill and in the National Capital Region since 2010: what was the total amount (i) allocated, (ii) spent, on the festivities, broken down by year?

(Return tabled)

Questions Passed as Orders for Returns

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

Public Complaints and Review Commission Act

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Minister of Public Safety]

moved that Bill C-20, An Act establishing the Public Complaints and Review Commission and amending certain Acts and statutory instruments, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Madam Speaker, I am honoured to open up the debate on second reading of Bill C-20, an act establishing the public complaints and review commission and amending certain acts and statutory instruments.

I would like to thank the members of the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security for their important review of systemic racism in the enforcement of the act.

By creating a new public complaints and review commission, the bill would provide new tools to ensure transparency and accountability of the institutions Canadians rely on to keep them safe, to keep them safe in their communities through the work of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and to keep them safe by protecting our international borders through the work of the Canada Border Services Agency. Canadians depend on these public safety organizations, but, at the same time, want assurances that these organizations will use the powers that have been entrusted to them responsibly.

Canadians have a right to consistent, fair and equal treatment when interacting with RCMP and CBSA officers. If members are not acting appropriately, Canadians naturally want and deserve assurances of a thorough review of these actions and consequences for any officer who engages in misconduct.

This is a fundamental principle of our democracy.

Our democracy depends on the principle of trust and confidence in our institutions, including law enforcement institutions. Independent civilian review overseeing is an essential element to that principle. This bill underscores it by creating an independent body that will strengthen transparency and autonomy through the independent review exercises of this new body.

Independence assures that Canadians can have their concerns taken seriously. The bill also underscores that principle. That is why this is stand-alone legislation rather than simply amending either the RCMP or CBSA Acts.

Currently, under the RCMP Act, an independent review and redress process is provided for by the RCMP through the CRCC, or Civilian Review and Complaints Commission. Current cases under the CRCC will be continued under the public complaints and review commission, or the PCRC, under the bill before us. The CBSA, on the other hand, currently has no independent review and redress process.

It is subject to review by various independent boards, tribunals and courts.

Without a dedicated review body, there is no avenue for independent investigation or review of public complaints against the CBSA.

The government has tried twice previously to address this shortfall by creating a review body for the CBSA. Some colleagues will recall that in 2019, our government introduced Bill C-98 and then in 2020, Bill C-3. Those pieces of proposed legislation sought to add CBSA review to the mandate of the existing CRCC, but both died on the Order Paper.

This issue has remained a priority for our government.

The 2020 Speech from the Throne included it in our agenda. The creation of a review body for the CBSA was of top priority and a component of the mandate that the Prime Minister gave to me when I took on this role in December of 2021.

It is time to give Canadians the accountability they deserve.

In the bill before us, the CRCC would be replaced by the new public complaints and review commission, which would continue to review the RCMP and would also become the independent review body for complaints concerning the CBSA.

The bill contains several mechanisms that would strengthen accountability beyond what has been available under the current CRCC for the RCMP. After engaging and listening to Canadians across the country, we have made significant reforms to the regimes proposed under Bill C-98 and Bill C-3 previously. We listened and we acted.

Therefore, in addition to creating a stand-alone law, other changes have been made.

This would subject the RCMP and CBSA to codified timelines. We heard complaints from Canadians regarding the RCMP's, at times, delayed response to reports from the CRCC. This time around, we are getting it right. The RCMP and the CBSA will have six months to respond to the PCRC's interim reports. They must also respond to certain reviews and recommendations of the PCRC within 60 days.

Second, the RCMP and the CBSA will be required to report annually to this office, the Minister of Public Safety, on their progress in implementing PCRC recommendations.

The third major change responds to a mandate the Prime Minister gave to me to combat systemic racism and discrimination in the criminal justice system, and advancing reconciliation with indigenous peoples. This is a critically important priority, especially at this time in our history.

Over the past number of years, in Canada and around the world, we have had necessary conversations about the presence and existence of systemic racism in law enforcement about the disproportionate mistreatment of Black, racialized and indigenous peoples across the country. It is high time that we act.

It is vitally important that this review system shed light on how to address these issues more fully.

Under the bill before us, the PCRC would collect and publish desegregated, race-based data on complainants in consultation with the RCMP and the CBSA.

I want to thank the chairperson of the CRCC, Michelaine Lahaie, and her colleagues for their advice and their vision on how the review process can become an essential tool to help not only understand systemic racism, but to eradicate it once and for all.

The fourth major change introduced in the bill would provide the PCRC with a public education and information mandate. The PCRC would implement programs to increase public knowledge and awareness of the PCRC's mandate and the right to redress.

Finally, the bill would address a gap in the current accountability and transparency regime involving how the CBSA responds to incidents of a serious nature.

These incidents can result in death or serious injury or violations of federal or provincial law.

The CBSA currently conducts its own internal reviews of such matters, but the bill before us would amend the CBSA Act so that the CBSA would be obligated to conduct such reviews. It would also need to notify both the PCRC and the police of appropriate jurisdiction.

The CBSA would also be required to provide the PCRC with reports and other information of serious incidents. The PCRC would have the authority to send an observer to assess the impartiality of these internal investigations. As part of its annual report to this office, the PCRC would also include the number, types and outcomes of serious incident allegations.

Taken together, these five changes represent a major step forward in the accountability and transparency mechanisms governing both the RCMP and the CBSA. The PCRC will be given the tools that it needs to help balance Canada's public safety and security priorities, as well as respect for the rights of the individuals with which they intersect.

To support the establishment of the commission, the government is investing $112.3 million over six years and $19.4 million ongoing. By creating an enhanced independent review body, the public complaints and review commission will help assure Canadians that they can continue to expect consistent, fair and equal treatment under the law when receiving services from the RCMP and the CBSA.

I urge all hon. members of the House to join me in supporting this important bill.

This is so Canada can assuage Canadians' concerns by creating greater transparency, oversight, and trust and confidence in our law institutions.

[Raquel Dancho, Conservative, Kildonan—St. Paul, MB]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the Minister of Public Safety's bringing forward this important bill. It is critical that we have oversight bodies to hold those who hold power in our country accountable, notably in this bill the RCMP and the CBSA.

Recently, we have been talking a lot about holding the RCMP accountable, particularly at the public safety committee. Recently in the Globe and Mail, certain journalists have talked about how our commissioner of the RCMP was texting the commissioner of the OPP concerning using applications on their phones that would not store deleted messages. To me, this seems like the commissioner was trying to avoid accountability for her communications on the Emergencies Act invocation.

I wonder if this bill would do anything to hold the RCMP commissioner accountable for trying to hide any evidence and if the Minister of Public Safety is concerned about the commissioner's looking to use applications that would permanently delete text messages that could be used as evidence in the Emergencies Act invocation.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her work on the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security. I am proud to be part of a government that believes in transparency.

The commissioner of the RCMP's testimony repeatedly before the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, other committees and her upcoming appearance before the Public Order Emergency Commission is a vehicle to ensure that we are shining a light so there can be accountability when it comes to not only law enforcement's role, but, indeed, to the government's role with regard to our interactions when it comes to upholding public safety.

At the same time, I want to encourage my colleague and all the members of her Conservative caucus to support the bill, if my colleague believes in transparency and accountability and she sees the work we have put into Bill C-20, which would set up enhanced rigour around civilian review so there can be accountability for which she advocates. By supporting the bill, we are taking a step in that direction, so all Canadians can have trust and confidence in their institutions, including in the RCMP.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for honouring his commitment to bring Bill C-20 before the House. This is an important debate.

My riding of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford is policed entirely by the RCMP. I do enjoy good relations with them, but it is no secret that the force as a whole has some major problems. This has been detailed in the public safety committee's report on systemic racism in policing.

We know, particularly, the problems indigenous people have had with the RCMP. The actions of the community-industry response group of the B.C. RCMP have been well documented with respect to the types of tactics used against indigenous protesters. Therefore, it is important that we add this layer of accountability and transparency, with legislative timelines for review.

However, while I do believe that report influenced a lot of what we see in Bill C-20, I want to know how the minister is going to work to include indigenous oversight on this review body and how he is going to include indigenous investigators and decision-makers, so they are a part of this process and truly walking that path of reconciliation to involve them in an issue that affects them more than most Canadians combined.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's concerns that while we enhance civilian review for the RCMP, we are also walking the path of reconciliation. I want to assure him that, as part of my broader mandate, we are taking concrete steps to diversify through better recruitment and retention of indigenous peoples within the RCMP, within the CBSA and within all frontline agencies that work within the public safety community, so indigenous peoples see themselves reflected in the institutions that are there to keep them safe. As my colleague will know, we are also making huge strides when it comes to stabilizing and enhancing first nations and indigenous policing right across the country.

He will know that recently we worked with our colleagues in Alberta to set the foundational framework to bring back a Siksika Nation police service. We recently have worked with our colleagues in Saskatchewan to put in place the money that is required to invest in similar steps taken for the Prince Albert, including the James Smith Cree Nation community should it choose to do that, so that we see more indigenous-led policing initiatives across the country. We have also recently created the position of a Correctional Services deputy commissioner for indigenous affairs. There is so much work that we still need to do.

I look forward to working with my colleague when it comes to reconciliation and public safety.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, two questions in a row is a rare occurrence, and I will take advantage of it.

I would like to ask the minister about another part of Bill C-20. The text of the legislation would allow provincial ministers and the federal Minister of Public Safety to initiate investigations. As parliamentarians, we are frequently made aware, not only by our constituents but also at committee, of certain transgressions that may be attributed to both the CBSA and the RCMP.

I would ask the hon. minister if he would be open to amendments at committee that would allow parliamentarians and committee bodies to ask the commission to investigate both the RCMP and CBSA because of information we may have received.

[Marco Mendicino, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Madam Chair, as I am inclined to say whenever it comes to questions of working with committees and their independent study of bills such as this one, I will always keep an open mind. However, I want to underscore that the focus of this legislation is, of course, to give Canadians greater access when they have concerns about the conduct or potential misconduct of the RCMP and, I do want to highlight, the CBSA. This is one of the major vacuums this bill addresses.

Right now, as the law exists, there is no independent civilian review of the Canada Border Services Agency. In my many conversations with communities across this country, including ethnic communities, religious communities, racialized communities and indigenous peoples, on their interactions with the CBSA, they have called for this legislation.

To the credit of the CBSA, it has also called for this legislation, and to the credit of the CBSA and the president of the CBSA, they embrace this legislation and understand that we need to continue to push forward with reforms. They understand that those reforms have to be done in conjunction with civilian review, so we can enhance transparency and accountability, as an extension of the public confidence we need to have in our institutions.

Of course, I do look forward to continuing a dialogue with my colleague on the work of the committee as well.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Madam Speaker, I think I am setting a record here in the House of Commons with three questions in a row for the minister.

I am glad the minister mentioned the CBSA, because as many people would know, there have been at least 16 deaths in CBSA custody since the year 2000. I would like the minister to clarify how exactly we are going to hold the CBSA to account for these deaths in the past. I would also like to know if he has any words to the families, both here in Canada and abroad, who have had family members die in CBSA custody. It is critical that the minister stand in this place to underline how important it is that we hold this particular agency to account, given that very sorry and dismal track record.