Karen McCrimmon

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, May 17th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, as I said, we had a very ambitious timetable. We knew we had to make some substantive and really challenging changes to our national security agencies and the way they operate. We committed to Canadians to do just that. Piece by piece incremental change was the approach we decided to take to bring Canadians along. It was also to explain, educate and consult on how we are actually making our national security agencies work better for them, which is going to keep them safe and at the same time respect their rights and freedoms.

The member is right. We have been having these discussions for three and a half years. However, now I think we are at the point where people understand what the strengths and opportunities are. Of course, people always want to do more, and so do we, but it was important to do this in an incremental way to get the buy-in from Canadians, and that is the approach we took.

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, May 17th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, if we look at the minister's mandate letter and the amount of work that needed to be done to improve our national security agencies and independent oversight, there was quite a bit of work to do, and we felt that we needed to put the most significant pieces of that puzzle together first.

If we could get buy-in from this House and the other place on the most substantive pieces, based on the principles that underlie those pieces of law, people could say that the government explained, up to now, why we needed these kinds of oversight bodies and they could agree. We felt that we had to build the case for these kinds of oversight bodies incrementally.

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, May 17th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, if we look at the list of bills that have come forward on public safety, it really is quite substantial. Yes, after the 2015 election, the mandate letter given to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness was quite significant. We believe that we tackled the most difficult and contentious issues first and fit those pieces of the puzzle together. We had to create a framework within which this particular initiative would fit. That is the reason behind the order with which we brought legislation forward to this House.

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, May 17th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, since the fall of 2016, our government has been dramatically reshaping Canada’s security and intelligence apparatus to ensure that it has the authorities and the funding it needs in order to keep Canadians safe. At the same time, we have been ensuring that those agencies, which we trust with tremendous power, have strong and robust independent review mechanisms so that the public can be confident that they are using their powers appropriately.

These mechanisms instill confidence in the public that these agencies are using their powers appropriately. Since 2018, following the passage of Bill C-22, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, or NSICOP, has been reviewing classified national security information. The committee, which is formed of three senators and eight elected members of Parliament, recently released its first annual report. This brings Canada into line with all four of our other Five Eyes alliance allies when it comes to parliamentary or congressional review of national security activities.

Bill C-59, which is currently awaiting third reading debate in the Senate, would create a national security and intelligence review agency. This would be a stand-alone review body that would incorporate the existing Security Intelligence Review Committee, or SIRC, which reviews the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, CSIS, and the Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner, which reviews the Communications Security Establishment, CSE.

The agency would also have the powers and authorities to review any department with a national security function. Some academics and experts have dubbed this idea a “super SIRC“. They have argued for years that such a body is needed so that it can follow the thread of evidence from one department to another rather than ending its investigation at the boundaries of a single agency. The Federal Court has also suggested that this kind of super review agency needs to be created. We have done all of this so that Canadians can be confident that our security and intelligence community has the tools it needs to keep Canadians safe.

This brings me to Bill C-98. The one piece missing from this review architecture puzzle, should Bill C-59 pass, of course, is an independent review body for non-national security-related reviews of the Canada Border Services Agency, or CBSA. Bill C-98 would fill in that gap by creating PCRC, or the public complaints and review commission.

The new agency would combine the existing review body for the RCMP, known as the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission, CRCC, with the yet to be created review body for the Canada Border Services Agency. It would add a mandatory new deputy chair position to the new agency. Budget 2019 has provided nearly $25 million over the next five years to ensure there is enough staff to take on this new important role.

I would now like to walk members through how the PCRC would work in practice. A Canadian who has a complaint about the actions or behaviour of a CBSA member would lodge a complaint with either the Canada Border Services Agency itself or the PCRC. Regardless of where it is filed, one agency would alert the other to the complaint. There will be no wrong door for Canadians to knock on. The system will work for them in either case.

The CBSA would then be required to investigate every complaint, much like the existing CRCC does for the RCMP. If the chair believes it would be in the public interest to do so, the PCRC can initiate its own investigation.

The vast majority of complaints to the CBSA are already handled to the satisfaction of the complainant. For those who are not satisfied, complainants would be informed that they can request a subsequent complaint review from the fully independent PCRC. The review agency would have full access to documents and the power to compel witnesses in order to ensure it can undertake a thorough investigation. If, upon review, the PCRC were not satisfied with the CBSA's investigations and conclusions, it would make a report with any findings and recommendations.

There are several areas that the CCRC would not be able to investigate because there are already existing bodies which could handle those types of complaints. For instance, officers of Parliament like the Privacy Commissioner and the Commissioner of Official Languages are best suited to deal with complaints that fall within their jurisdiction.

Should someone file a complaint with the CBSA or the CCRC that falls within those realms, either body would decline the complaint but inform that individual of the proper course of action.

The chair of the new PCRC would be able to conduct reviews of CBSA activities, behaviours, policies, procedures and guidelines not related to national security. National security reviews would, of course, be handled by NSIRA. The Minister of Public Safety could also ask the agency to undertake such a review.

In addition, the PCRC would be notified of any serious incident in which the actions of a CBSA officer may have resulted in serious injury or death. This includes immigration detainees who are being held in provincial corrections facilities on behalf of the CBSA. Further, the Minister of Public Safety or the president of the CBSA may deem that in incidents of such significance, the PCRC must investigate.

Bill C-98 would complete the review architecture for the public safety portfolio by creating a review body similar to the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP, or the Office of the Correctional Investigator for Correctional Service Canada. This is another important step that would ensure Canadians have confidence in our border agency. However, it is far from the only improvement that our government has made over these past four years.

Let us take, for instance, the new immigration detention framework and its focus on best rights of the child, increased resources to combat gun and opioid smuggling at the border, and new money for detector dogs that will help to ensure African swine fever-contaminated meat does not enter Canada and decimate the stock of pork producers.

There is the new entry-exit legislation, which closes a major security gap by allowing us to know when someone is leaving the country, and the new Preclearance Act, which allows for the expansion of pre-clearance sites in all four modes: air, land, marine and rail. In addition, this act provides cargo pre-clearance to reduce wait times at the border.

Our government takes the security of Canada’s border seriously and knows that it not only needs to be secure from threats that would enter, but also be open to the legitimate travel and trade that drives our economy.

The time left in the 42nd Parliament is, unfortunately, growing short, and I am convinced that this piece of legislation would be, by leaps and bounds, an improvement over the status quo. There is a reason we committed to doing this particular action. We know that having independent oversight bodies will make a difference. We have worked hard to make that happen with the RCMP, and now our other national security agencies have the same kind of mechanisms. It is all about instilling confidence in the public that the powers our national security agencies have are being used appropriately and that their privacy, rights and freedoms are being respected. At the same time, our national security agencies are working hard to keep them safe.

One of the most significant steps forward was the implementation of Bill C-22 and the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians, because now we have representatives from Parliament actually having access to classified security information and making judgments about where we should go, what the priorities are and what the major threats are, and the committee members can share that information among themselves in a non-partisan way.

The chair of the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians went before committee and talked about the work it does. It has issued its first annual report. The chair talked about the ability of this committee of parliamentarians to act in a non-partisan nature. That is what allows it to do the kind of work we need it to do. There are three senators and eight elected members of Parliament, and it is working. The other Five Eyes alliance countries have a parliamentary or congressional review body, and now Canada does too.

Bill C-59, which we have talked about, would create the national security and intelligence review agency. This stand-alone body would incorporate the existing Security Intelligence Review Committee, which reviews CSIS, and the Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner, which reviews CSE. Having this review function under one single umbrella would give it the flexibility and ability to focus where it believes it needs to be done. It would also have the power and authority to review any department with a national security function.

I like the name super SIRC. I think it is representative of what we are trying to do, which is create an oversight organization that has the bandwidth and authority to review any national security agency's work to make sure that it is being done in terms of the legal authorities it has and that also has the ability to go across national security agencies if it needs to find information that pertains to a particular issue.

We have argued for years that we needed such a body that could follow a thread of evidence from one department to another, from one national security agency, across boundaries, to another. Even the Federal Court agrees that this kind of review agency needs to be created.

It comes back to having national security agencies that have the confidence of their people. I believe that now, with these independent oversight agencies that have been put in place, Canadians can be confident that our security and intelligence community has the tools to keep them safe while at the same time respecting their privacy, respecting their freedoms and respecting their rights.

The Canada Border Services Agency was the last piece. In Bill C-98, we would create the public complaints and review commission, the PCRC. This new agency would combine the existing review body for the RCMP, known as the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission, with the yet to be created review body for the CBSA. It would add a mandatory new deputy chair position to the new agency.

I would like to walk the members through how the PCRC, the public complaints and review commission, would work in practice.

A Canadian who had a complaint about the actions or behaviour of a CBSA member would lodge a complaint with either the CBSA itself or with the public complaints and review commission. There would be two options to file a complaint. The system would be designed so that once a complaint was filed with one agency, it would automatically be transferred to the other agency. Both would know what was going on, and both would be responsible for addressing the particular complaint. On top of that, even if a complaint had not been issued, if the chair of the public complaints and review commission believed that it was in the public interest to do so, the public complaints and review commission could initiate its own investigation.

If one submitted a complaint to the CBSA and was not happy with the result, one could request a subsequent complaint review by the fully independent public complaints and review commission. This would give the agencies two opportunities to address complaints from the public. This review agency would have full access to documents and the power to compel witnesses to ensure that it could make a thorough investigation.

I am convinced that this piece of legislation is, by leaps and bounds, an improvement over the status quo. While some may want to improve some parts, I think most of us would agree that Canadians would be better off if this bill were to receive royal assent before we rise this summer. As we all know, Parliament can move quite expeditiously when we are all of a mind to do something in the public interest. If any of my colleagues in this chamber, on either side of the aisle, would like to discuss the prospects of this bill's passage, I would be pleased to have that conversation with them.

[Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, May 17th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by stating that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Scarborough—Guildwood this morning.

[Business of Supply, May 15th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, the government understands that diversity is our strength and an essential factor in mission success. Could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence tell us how we are working to meet our objective to increase the representation of women by 1% every year over the next 10 years to 25% of the overall force?

[Business of Supply, May 15th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, maybe my hon. colleagues will like this question better.

In 2013, defence spending was $15.6 billion, dropping below 1% GDP under the previous government. In 2018, defence spending was $21.3 billion. The Leader of the Opposition's plan for defence has no specifics, and that means perhaps more cuts for our men and women in uniform all over again. They will not even have their electoral platform costed by the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

Could the parliamentary secretary compare that lack of vision and transparency with our own defence policy?

[Business of Supply, May 15th, 2019]

I have pictures.

As the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons said, “The only tweet that the Conservatives will not change is their affiliation with Faith Goldy. They seem to be very proud when it comes to those actions.” It is out there for Canadians to see whether they like it or not.

When it comes to association with far right movements, personalities and ideas, could the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence inform the House how racist—

[Business of Supply, May 15th, 2019]

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to rise and speak to the important subject of diversity and inclusion in our Canadian Armed Forces. I will take the next 10 minutes to address how the Canadian Armed Forces fosters and encourages diversity so that our forces remain strong, serve our whole society and will endure in the future.

Unlike the previous government, which repeatedly cut support to the Canadian Armed Forces, we are ensuring that the Canadian Armed Forces has the right mix of people, equipment and training to meet the important demands placed upon it.

We recognize that diversity is an essential factor in overall mission success, and that is why we are committed to making progress on that issue. I personally know that the work done around an inclusive and collaborative decision-making table is improved by the diversity of its members. Whether that diversity is gender, identity, expression, orientation, ethnicity, language, experience, heritage or religion, each brings different perspectives that when added together will support better decisions, better plans and better strategies.

A diverse and inclusive force is more operationally effective. It improves how we understand the human dimension of conflict zones, affording greater access to communities.

In Afghanistan, for example, some of our women in uniform worked closely with local women to gather crucial intelligence, situational awareness and build relationships with local communities. Men could not have accessed that intelligence.

These are just some of the reasons that our defence policy of “Strong, Secure, Engaged” makes diverse perspectives a critical component in our decision-making. Our commitment to diversity includes growing the representation of women in the Canadian military to at least 25% of the total force by 2026.

Our government is committed to gender equality and to providing a work environment where women are welcomed, supported and respected. Increasing enrolment is a critical part of that commitment, and that is why we have announced initiatives that will draw on Canada's diversity, including increasing enrolment of women.

Knowing the operational and cultural value that women bring to our forces, Canada launched the second national action plan on women, peace and security in November 2017, with the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces as major partners. The plan prioritizes women's involvement in all of Canada's military activities.

We know that women and men, boys and girls all experience conflict differently. The action plan has bold objectives to advance gender equality and the leadership role of women and girls in all stages of conflict resolution and to protect their human rights throughout.

Canada is also expanding its influence and values on the world stage. In 2017, we hosted the United Nations Peacekeeping Defence Ministerial conference in Vancouver, where we launched the Vancouver principles to prevent the recruitment and use of child soldiers and the Elsie initiative to increase the participation of women in peacekeeping. Through the Elsie initiative for Women in Peace Operations, Canada works with the UN to integrate women's perspectives into peace processes, from conflict prevention and conflict resolution to reconciliation and economic recovery post-conflict. We are making sure that women's voices and different lived experiences are represented for meaningful participation in peace operations.

Notably, Canada is already a world leader in terms of the proportion of women in its military. For example, the number of women in senior leadership roles has almost doubled since 2015.

All Canadian Armed Forces occupations and environments are open to people of any gender, who are selected for training, promotions, postings, and career opportunities based on rank, qualifications, and merit.

The Canadian Armed Forces actively recruits qualified women for challenging career opportunities. Applicants interested in joining an under-strength occupation and applicants who help meet diversity objectives are processed in priority.

Of course, the forces will always have room for talented, motivated and qualified Canadians who meet requirements and standards for personnel selection, and all applicants' files are addressed with due diligence.

In addition to recruiting a more diverse workforce, Canadian Armed Forces members must all be properly equipped and cared for through the duration of their careers. That is why gender-based analysis-plus, GBA+, integration is now part of all defence team activities.

For example, the new Arctic and offshore patrol ships coming later this year will have single or double occupancy crew cabins and individual washroom facilities. This will allow for greater comfort, easier distribution of a mixed gender crew and accommodation of other specific needs. Additionally, the equipment is designed to be operated by a very broad range of physical body characteristics to accommodate members' size, strength and weight.

On a more sombre note, allow me to state the obvious. In our armed forces and everywhere else, every person deserves a professional environment in which he or she is treated with respect and dignity. Inappropriate sexual behaviour of any kind is completely unacceptable and will not be tolerated. Our government takes all allegations of sexual misconduct very seriously.

Our military faces well-known challenges that it is working hard to address, so it can recruit and retain more diverse members by fostering a culture based on trust, respect and dignity for everyone. The Canadian Armed Forces has taken significant steps to address all forms of sexual misconduct in its rank, but there is still much work to do.

Military leadership continues to press forward, understanding that people are at the heart of everything it does and that the military must exemplify the beliefs and values of the Canadians they serve.

It has also been important to address the anti-LGBTQ2 practices and policies of the past.

In March 2018, the Government of Canada signed the final settlement of the LGBT purge class action suit, providing up to $110 million dollars to compensate those federal public servants, members of the Canadian Armed Forces and the RCMP directly impacted by anti-LGBTQ2 practices. The Prime Minister formally apologized to those Canadians harmed by federally sanctioned practices.

We must also act to ensure a harassment and discrimination-free work environment at all times. That is why in January 2018, National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces launched the positive space initiative to promote a safe and inclusive work environment for all employees regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

As part of the government's commitment to inclusion, National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces are enhancing relationships with indigenous communities. As the Prime Minister has said, no relationship is more important to our government than our relationship with first nations.

One way the Canadian Armed Forces makes important contributions to Canada's reconciliation with indigenous people is through occupational and leadership training and experience, all of which contributes to a renewed relationship.

The Canadian Forces aboriginal entry program provides indigenous people with an opportunity to get hands-on experience with military training, careers and the military lifestyle, with no obligation to join the forces. With the skills they develop, indigenous members and veterans can assist with economic governance and other priorities when they refocus these skills in their communities once they complete the programs or they can choose to continue serving in the regular or reserve force.

My time is limited and therefore I can only touch on some examples, but I would invite members to look at the good work the defence team has been doing when it comes to the Kapyong Barracks or how, in Canada's north, rangers work diligently to protect our sovereignty, perform search and rescue operations and carry out operations and patrols.

We know we need a Canadian solution that works for our unique country and our specific values. We can be confident that the leadership of the Canadian Armed Forces is fostering an inclusive, diverse and harassment-free work environment for all those who serve our country.

I would like to use the remainder of my time to ask questions of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence.

We know the Conservatives do not mind being associated with the likes of Faith Goldy and the Rebel, until they are caught that is.

[Foreign Affairs, May 9th, 2019]

Mr. Speaker, the Criminal Code listing regime is an important tool for countering terrorism and is part of the government's commitment to keep Canadians safe.

The update to the listings is an important step to fight terrorism globally and ensure that Canada remains a safe and peaceful country. There is a prescribed step-by-step process. New entities are added once it has been determined that they meet the legal threshold.