Public Safety committee  As laid out in the legislation and the agreement, officers are limited. They can ask the person for their identity and their reasons for withdrawing. Regarding the circumstances for the purposes of maintaining security of the border, an example might be if during the course of

Public Safety committee  There are a couple of points to highlight. As Minister Goodale mentioned, U.S. officers will be trained in the procedures used by Canadian officers, in terms of the standards for detaining people for the purposes of a search, so there is training. In terms of individuals who ar

Public Safety committee  As for the specific figure that Minister Goodale mentioned, we had asked our colleagues at U.S. Customs and Border Protection and CBSA to look at their statistics for the last year, and there were no cases in the past year where U.S. Customs and Border Protection had asked CBSA t

Public Safety committee  Yes. That's correct.

Public Safety committee  There are no specific provisions around that in terms of U.S. officers. The same provisions that apply currently in pre-clearance apply to the U.S. officers, so there is no requirement for them to provide services in a variety of languages. Martin, could you speak to that, in te

Public Safety committee  I'll just elaborate on that. As Minister Goodale stated, there are limited authorities in terms of questioning a traveller upon withdrawal. Again, it's to ascertain their identity and their reasons for withdrawing. The expectation is that there would be a limited set of questions

Public Safety committee  As you mentioned, there was a cargo pre-clearance pilot under the beyond the border agreement. The initial testing phase was done in B.C., and there was a second phase in Ontario. At this point, there are no specific sites identified for cargo pre-clearance. We are beginning to

Public Safety committee  The present Prime Minister committed last year to explore the terms and conditions for cargo pre-clearance and to explore possible pilots. That's what we are looking at right now with the U.S.

Public Safety committee  That's correct. It is about 12 million per year. I don't believe we have any projections. I'll turn to my colleague from Transport to double-check on that.

Public Safety committee  We don't have specific projections on that. There are two points to make in terms of the agreement. The agreement does provide for cost recovery for new pre-clearance operations, so the eight existing airports are protected from cost recovery unless there's some kind of extraor

Public Safety committee  That certainly is factoring into the discussions we're having with the U.S. to make sure that a fair and clear cost-recovery model is applied, but it also factors into the decisions, finally, about whether a site will undertake pre-clearance. It has to be economically viable for

Public Safety committee  I can't speak to, specifically, how many regulatory changes will be required, but there will be regulatory changes required in relation to both part 1 and part 2 of the act. Part 1 is U.S. operating pre-clearance in Canada, and part 2 is Canada operating pre-clearance in the U.S.

Public Safety committee  We are still exploring that right now. I think we could provide you with a general outline of the types of areas where regulations will be required.

Public Safety committee  As I mentioned, the current pre-clearance operations are protected from cost recovery. That was one of the elements in the negotiations over a number of years. The U.S. is pursuing global pre-clearance, and they're applying cost recovery in all their operations. In fact, they're

Public Safety committee  As Martin mentioned earlier, signage would be in both official languages, so travellers would be able to understand what their rights and obligations are in both official languages. That takes us back to one of those factors in terms of the unreasonable delay and the discussion