:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon to members of the committee. It's a pleasure to be with you again to discuss the estimates today.
I have a familiar cast of characters with me. Malcolm Brown is the Deputy Minister of Public Safety. John Ossowski is the President of the Canada Border Services Agency. Anne Kelly is the Commissioner of the Correctional Service of Canada. Jeff Yaworski is the Acting Director for CSIS. Gilles Michaud is Deputy Commissioner for the RCMP.
I would point out that as of last week, Deputy Commissioner Michaud has been elected Delegate for the Americas to serve on the executive committee of INTERPOL, representing our continent in that important organization.
Again, I want to thank members of the committee for the diligent work that you do on matters related to public safety. The volume and gravity of the key pieces of legislation, the policy changes, and the major investments that we have been making are very substantial. Your scrutiny and advice have helped to inform that work, which includes, for example, the new regime that Canada now has in place with respect to cannabis, a modernized national security framework that was developed in the context of Bill and new strong actions in relation to gun and gang violence. That's just to name a few.
We are in the midst of extraordinary changes to Canada's public safety environment, and Canadians are seeing some direct benefits. This month alone, we have announced millions of dollars in new funding for public safety projects from coast to coast. Those projects help our communities plan and prepare for natural disasters like floods. They improve our collective ability to effectively counter radicalization to violence in new and innovative ways. They help communities steer youth away from criminal and risky behaviour, such as guns, gangs and drugs.
Of course, there is also the $86 million that we announced earlier this month to support both the RCMP and the CBSA in their efforts to combat gun and gang violence. Keeping Canadians safe clearly requires efforts at every level, from communities to NGOs to governments to law enforcement and security agencies and beyond.
Today, in these estimates that are the subject matter for this meeting, we're looking at the spending authorities the portfolio needs to accomplish those objectives. Through these supplementary estimates (A), the Public Safety portfolio is requesting adjustments resulting in a net increase of $262 million. That represents a change of 2.6% over existing authorities. It's largely because several portfolio organizations have now received Treasury Board approval to increase appropriations and have received or are making transfers to and from other organizations.
All told, the approval of these estimates, including in-year adjustments, would result in total portfolio authorities increasing to $10.5 billion for the current fiscal year.
For my part today, I'll try to break down the key highlights of these changes across the portfolio, and I'll speak to just a few current priorities.
First, I note that these estimates provide a great snapshot of just how closely this portfolio must work together. Thirteen of the spending initiatives, with a total value of over $144 million, are horizontal in nature, requiring close collaboration among the organizations within this portfolio. I'll single out three in particular.
One of the most prominent is the $29.9 million requested in these estimates for the initiative to take action against guns and gangs, to which I alluded earlier. The evidence is clear: Gun and gang violence is a growing problem for Canadians.
Last year, I announced a total of new funding of $327.6 million over five years to help address this issue. A portion of that total—over $200 million over five years—will help provinces and territories address gun and gang issues through initiatives specific to the needs of their local communities.
The nearly $30 million that is requested in these estimates will help the CBSA, the RCMP and Public Safety Canada to carry out this collaborative new guns and gangs initiative.
On the theme of collaboration, I would also highlight the $50.3 million requested by my department to be transferred to the RCMP in support of the first nations policing program in various communities across Canada. Indigenous communities, like all other communities in Canada, should be safe places where families can thrive and economies can flourish. Public safety is essential for social and economic development. That's why I announced last year that the government is investing an incremental $291.2 million over five years in policing in first nations and Inuit communities currently served under the first nations policing program. That is the single largest investment in the program since it was first created back in 1991. For the first time, the funding will be both ongoing and indexed so that first nations communities can have the confidence that their police forces will have the resources they need into the future.
A third horizontal initiative is reflected in the $7.1 million requested for CSIS and CBSA to support the 2018 to 2020 immigration plan. As you know, announced a multi-year plan that would welcome some 980,000 new permanent residents to our country by 2020. Public Safety portfolio organizations are very important partners in the immigration and refugee system, helping determine admissibility to Canada and providing security screening. Again, this funding will support their efforts.
Mr. Chair, that's just a quick snapshot of some of the collaborative work the portfolio is undertaking.
I'll briefly outline some of the other more prominent dollar amounts requested by some of our portfolio partners.
These estimates would provide the CBSA with a net increase in budgetary expenditures of $94.1 million. Along with supporting action against gun and gang violence, as well as immigration activities, that funding will also enhance the passenger protect program and other priorities.
The RCMP is seeking a net increase of $163.3 million in these estimates for the first nations policing program that I mentioned, and the guns and gangs initiative, as well as for G7 security, efforts related to the new cannabis regime, and much more.
Finally, I'll also highlight a requested net increase of $16 million to the spending authorities for CSIS, and an increase of $2.3 million to the Correctional Service of Canada. will have more details to share on today's estimates during the next hour of your meeting.
With respect to immediate priorities, it's safe to say that we won't be slowing down in the near future. For example, you can expect to see new measures responding to the mandate that we have given to the new commissioner of the RCMP. With the new cannabis regime in place, we'll be presenting legislation soon to make things fairer for Canadians who have been previously convicted of the offence of simple possession.
In closing, I understand that this committee will begin clause-by-clause consideration of Bill later this week. I have been following the testimony and your lines of questioning very closely. Even though we are eliminating the practice of administrative segregation through this bill and introducing the new concept of structural intervention units, it is clear that some form of independent review mechanism for individuals who do not take part in programming within the structured intervention units would make stakeholders more comfortable with this very ambitious legislation. As indicated previously, I would be amenable to such a change, and I look forward to your work on clause-by-clause study.
As members likely know, creating a review mechanism would be a new and distinct function that would require a royal recommendation. That includes changing the terms and conditions of the original royal recommendation that was included at the beginning with Bill , which of course would make such an amendment inadmissible at the committee stage.
If members are interested in such an amendment, my office would be more than willing to work with you in preparing such a report stage amendment. I would seek the appropriate royal recommendation from my cabinet colleagues.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to appear, Mr. Chair. Welcome to you in your role as chair today. I'm glad to be here and to have the opportunity to answer any questions.
:
In my view, that would be very much a regressive step. It would, for example, eliminate all the work that has been done very conscientiously on all sides of the table with respect to background checks.
Very often, legislation with respect to firearms can be controversial. It can be divisive, but I note in the debate, both in the House and at this committee, the issue of background checks. There was near unanimity on the value of the provisions that were put into Bill , and indeed the committee worked very hard to strengthen those provisions to make sure that the background checks were effective.
The same, I think, can be said with respect to many of the other provisions in Bill , and I note that the committee took the perhaps unusual step—but I think the important step—of inserting into Bill C-71 a clarifying amendment that made it abundantly clear that nothing in that legislation could ever be interpreted as a backdoor long-gun firearm registry, which has been a concern for some people.
With that clarification now in the law, that nothing in Bill could ever be interpreted in such a way as to create a long-gun registry, the other provisions in Bill C-71 are, I think, very valid. They make legitimate contributions to public safety, and again I recall the words of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, which said that this is very important legislation that will assist them in fighting crime and in keeping Canadians safe.
[English]
I hope I make it to the end of my seven minutes without my voice conking out here.
Minister and officials, thank you all for being here.
I just want to continue on the Bill piece there, and what you talked about with respect to royal recommendations. I want to delve into that a little bit, since you did bring it up.
It seems to me that you aren't imagining a specific solution, because there are some solutions that would not require a royal recommendation, one of them being, for example, judicial oversight, which dates back to a recommendation from Justice Arbour. There's currently a regulatory framework that has been used as an example of something that could be used for independent oversight, which is the independent chairperson, which exists in the disciplinary context.
Given that you've mentioned the need for a royal recommendation, that precludes there being a specific remedy in mind for this particular criticism, and to Mr. Motz's point, he did steal some of my thunder, because I have never seen a bill get panned so unanimously by committee witnesses the way this one has.
I'm wondering if you're envisaging something in particular and if you've already discounted the possibility, for example, of judicial oversight, which would not require a royal recommendation.
:
I got through part of the answer with Mr. Motz.
There are four components to this funding—the $327 million that's spread over five years, and then what will become $100 million per year every year thereafter.
The largest chunk of the $327 million will be $214 million. That will be transferred from the Government of Canada to provinces through federal-provincial transfer agreements, and then the provinces will determine, within their jurisdiction, how to allocate that funding to local municipalities or local groups and organizations.
Some of it undoubtedly will go into policing services to provide greater coordination and to enhance the delivery of policing services on the streets dealing directly with gang- and gun-related issues. Some of it may well go to community organizations that work on crime prevention initiatives and the disruption of gangs, or services that get young people out of gangs once they've been entrapped in that negative lifestyle. The provinces with municipalities and with local law enforcement will determine the allocation of that $214 million to local community-based activities.
There's another $51 million that's going to CBSA to deal with border interdiction. How do you stop smuggled guns from getting into the country? That may involve new technology. It may involve additional staff or better training. It may involve sniffer dogs in the right locations who sometimes are even better than the technology. CBSA will allocate that $51 million to upgrade their ability at the border to stop smuggled guns from coming here in the first place.
There's another $35 million that goes to the RCMP to break up the firearms trafficking networks and to enhance their services right across the country in dealing with the illegal use of firearms.
If you add all of those things together, you'll find that there's another $25 million or so in the process. That will be used for things like data collection, and this has been one of the frustrations for policy-makers in this field.
The argument goes on. Are most of the illegal crime guns smuggled into the country from the U.S., or are they from straw purchases, domestically sourced within Canada? We'll be able to get better data by working with police forces, working with Statistics Canada to be more precise about the origination of illegal firearms.
The reality for a local community, though, is that whether the firearm is smuggled or whether it's the result of a straw purchase or a break-in at a legitimate gun shop, it's still a crime gun, and we want to stop it from doing damage on the street.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I was quite interested in participating in a new approach to these committee meetings whereby you would ask the questions first and then I would deliver my remarks. I want to thank Ms. Dabrusin for sharing her time with me.
Good afternoon, everyone.
I'm very pleased and honoured to have the opportunity to attend before this committee today to speak about the supplementary estimates (A) for the Public Safety portfolio as it pertains to my responsibilities.
I know you have just spent an hour with Minister Goodale, who noted earlier that the portfolio as a whole is requesting adjustments for the fiscal year resulting in a net increase of $262 million in authorities.
The minister, I believe, has given this committee a broad overview of the estimate items and why they are important for Canadians. My remarks today will focus on those items that fall strictly within my purview and my mandate and its priorities. Specifically, I hope to focus my attention on two issues that are top of mind for Canadians, the cannabis implementation and guns and gangs.
The country is currently seeing a surge in gun violence. Much of that violence is related to gang activities involving reprisals or rival gangs battling over turf. Mr. Chair and committee members, this is not simply happening in large urban centres in our country; smaller cities are plagued by this problem, as well as rural and indigenous communities. People are concerned.
I have had the opportunity over the past several months to travel across the country to communities large and small. We're listening to their concerns and then working hard to take concrete action to reduce violent gun crime and to keep communities safe.
Just over one year ago, the government announced the launch of an initiative to take action against gun and gang violence. This initiative reflects the need to take a broad and all-encompassing approach to reducing violence in our communities. For example, we recognize that while this is a nationwide concern, the problem is not the same everywhere: Different regions and communities are facing distinct and unique challenges, and those challenges require distinct and unique solutions. It's very important to hear perspectives from all parts of the country and from every perspective on the issue. We're making sure we do precisely that.
The Prime Minister has asked me to engage Canadians in a dialogue on handguns and assault-style weapons. I've been talking to experts, front-line police officers and members of the public across the country to seek their views, to listen to the evidence and to examine the data. I look forward to making recommendations based on those findings upon the completion of my examination.
We have also committed to investing $327.6 million over five years as part of a gun and gang violence action fund. This fund will help support a variety of initiatives that will help reduce gun crime related to gun and gang activities. A portion of that funding is aimed at reducing the supply of illegal guns that show up on our streets and get in the hands of people who would commit violent criminal acts with them. An important first step in eradicating gun and gang violence is investigating and stopping the smuggling of firearms, especially handguns, into our country. Our front-line law enforcement officers with the CBSA and the RCMP are already doing extraordinary work in that regard, and we have many examples to share of the successes they have achieved.
As Minister Goodale and I announced earlier this month, the government is making major investments to strengthen the enforcement capacity of the RCMP and the CBSA. Significant funding, for example, will be provided to the CBSA to increase its operational capacity to screen passengers and examine commercial shipments at the border.
Funding is also being provided to the RCMP for a new integrated criminal firearms initiative. These are important first steps to restore the force's ability to support law enforcement across the country to ensure that front-line officers have access to an integrated suite of resources to support firearm investigations.
At the same time, Mr. Chair, there's a clear consensus that gun and gang violence cannot be tackled through enforcement alone. I know from experience as a police officer and a police chief in a large urban centre that outreach and awareness are also essential. In other words, we need not only to interdict the supply of guns that get into the hands of criminals but to reduce the demand for those guns as well.
That's one reason the largest portion of the $327.6 million in new funding that has been announced, over $200 million over a five-year period, will be going to the provinces and territories to respond to specific needs in their communities.
We are aiming to start signing some of those funding agreements before the end of this calendar year. A major purpose of this funding is to support the efforts of local organizations that offer prevention and intervention programs. These types of programs help divert young people from gang culture that can almost inevitably draw them into a life of violence and criminality.
The response of any government must be to protect the health and safety of our citizens. There is no greater responsibility that all of us share, and that's why we are taking action on multiple fronts to reduce violent gun crime. Public Safety Canada, CBSA and the RCMP are seeking a combined total of $29.9 million in these supplementary estimates to support this important work.
Protecting Canadians is also why we have legalized, strictly regulated and restricted access to cannabis in Canada. Prior to October 17, all non-medical cannabis in this country was produced and sold, 100%, by criminal organizations. They were responsible for the illegal production and distribution of cannabis, and they made billions of dollars in illicit profit. What they were selling, Mr. Chair, to both adults and our kids, was unregulated, untested and often unsafe. It put the health and safety of Canadians at risk, and the system was failing our children. We had the highest rates of cannabis use of any country in the world. Our children were being criminalized for the simple possession of cannabis, and criminals were becoming enriched by that activity in the amount of billions of dollars each year.
We now have a far better, far more comprehensive and effective system in place. The new regulations offer Canadian adults a choice. It's a choice of a legal, regulated and reliable product of known potency and purity. We expect this will help to take a big bite out of the criminal black market.
However, our work has only begun; it is not yet complete. As I have said many times, the implementation of the Cannabis Act is a process, not an event. It's one reason that the RCMP is seeking $3.3 million in these supplementary estimates to support the delivery of Canada's new, legal cannabis framework.
The government also continues to take action to crack down on impaired driving. It's not a new problem, Mr. Chair. Since 1925, drug-impaired driving has been a crime in this country, but up until fairly recently, the police had neither the training, the legal authorities nor the access to the technologies they needed to be effective in keeping our country and our roadways safe.
The problem with drug-impaired driving did not suddenly come into existence simply because cannabis was now legally available from a legitimate, licensed source. Those who get behind the wheel after consuming drugs or alcohol represent a significant danger to the public, and this has always been the case, but I am pleased to tell you that today, with Bill now in effect, our police services have the tools that they have long asked for to keep the public and our roadways safe. The bill also strengthens our impaired driving laws with tough new penalties and new, important provisions to control alcohol-impaired driving as well.
All of this is to be complemented by important investments in public education and awareness. We want to ensure that Canadians know the dangers and consequences of driving while impaired by drugs, including cannabis. That's why we have been running an ad campaign on social media, online, on TV and elsewhere in the country to counter the persistent myths and misconceptions that Canadians unfortunately held with respect to cannabis-impaired driving. These ads are aimed at youth and young adults, and they have a simple message, Mr. Chair: don't drive high.
Public Safety Canada is seeking $2 million under the supplementary estimates to support this evolving campaign. Mr. Chair, the campaign is achieving a high level of success. We have heard from law enforcement agencies across the country that with the implementation of the new regulations, they have not seen a significant increase in drug-impaired driving, but what they have now available to them are the tools, the technology and the training they need to respond appropriately.
Mr. Chair, these are just a few examples of the important work that is happening across the Public Safety portfolio. I'd like to thank the hard-working men and women throughout the portfolio for all that they do, and acknowledge and thank the senior officials who have joined me here today. We are grateful for the work they do to protect Canadians from all manner of threats and dangers.
I'd like to thank the members of the committee for your efforts on the many public safety matters that come before you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to appear before you and answer the questions of your members.
:
Thank you very much, Julie. I'll try to be brief, because I want to be respectful of everyone's limited time.
First of all, I know Joan Howard and her son. I was involved in that investigation. You're right that she's a compelling advocate, as are so many mothers who have lost their children. I think they're a voice that we cannot ignore.
With respect to where the guns are coming from, one of the things that we did very carefully in Toronto when I worked there was examine the origin of every crime gun that came into our possession. We were able to identify the origin in most cases. They came, essentially, from two sources.
We live next to one of the largest handgun arsenals in the world, and guns are smuggled across the border from the United States. There are individuals who do it, but quite often criminal organizations are responsible for that. I will tell you that....
Perhaps I'll even refer to the RCMP and the CBSA, who are here. There are integrated border enforcement teams. There are very important comprehensive investigations, complex investigations, taking place into the organizations responsible for that. However, we also recognize that you can't just do that work at the border. It requires work on both sides of the border, and that's why we have integrated border enforcement teams. We saw some success recently with the CBSA working in partnership with the Toronto Police Service. They seized about 22 firearms, I believe.
Is that correct, John?
:
They seized 21 firearms that were secreted in a gas tank coming across the border. That's an important source of guns coming into Canada for criminal purposes.
The other source of guns that was identified was illegal diversion from the domestic market. That can happen at a number of different points.
It can happen at point of sale. For example, there were investigations that I was involved in with regard to an individual who went out and bought 77 handguns. He purchased them, having the appropriate licences and authorities required to acquire those guns, but he almost immediately ground the serial numbers off and sold them at a significant profit into the criminal realm. Very quickly, they were used in criminal acts. We recovered them at violent criminal offences and traced them back to him. He went to jail for about eight years. That's one of the ways.
We've also seen a number of instances of firearms being stolen, either from break and enters or from cars. There was a case just in the past week in southeast Saskatchewan in which someone broke into a home and stole 77 restricted and prohibited firearms, 73 of which were handguns. All of those guns are now in the hands of criminals and are available.
Quite frankly, there's no one simple thing to be done. Everything needs to be done. We need to ensure that we invest significantly in the investigative bodies, in access to the technologies and new tools and new methodologies, and in the techniques that CBSA has been investing in. I've been monitoring it very carefully. John is here with me and can tell you, perhaps, about some of the things that they're doing. They're significantly enhancing their capacity to detect.
I think what is equally important is that they're working very collaboratively with law enforcement through the integrated border enforcement teams and other types of joint-force initiatives. As we saw recently in Toronto, those are really effective in identifying some of those individuals. We are looking at a number of different measures to make it more difficult for guns to get into the hands of criminals by any method, whether smuggled across the border or illegally diverted from the domestic market.
I also want to say—because I think it's something that Ms. Howard has often raised with me as well—that we have a lot of work to do to make sure that we reduce the demand for guns within that community of young men, who so often use them to commit violent acts. It's just not a matter of interdicting the supply.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Dubé.
As I have said many times about this, it's a process, not an event.
On the process of the implementation, I've certainly acknowledged that some of the provinces—not all, but some—have experienced difficulties in their supply chain. In response to that, Health Canada has been working diligently when organizations and private entities qualify for a licence for the production of cannabis. On those licences, we've been moving through that process quite efficiently. A number of additional new licences have been granted. There's been about a 600% increase in the last 18 months in the growing capacity of those licensed producers. I remain confident that the system is capable of keeping pace.
We have seen a significant uptake. It appears that when you give Canadians a legal choice—a licensed, regulated, safe and socially responsible choice—they'll make it. They're demonstrating their willingness to embrace this new regulated system. I think that's why we're seeing perhaps higher than anticipated demand.
I don't have a precise estimate, but, quite frankly, every dollar spent for a legitimate source is one less dollar organized crime makes. On the very first day, several million dollars was spent in provincially licensed distribution centres, either online or in retail stores. That was several million dollars that organized crime didn't make that day. I think we're making significant progress. I'm confident that those supply chain problems will be worked out. I think the provinces that have had a good experience with us will be able to share their experience with those who are still in the process of implementation.
We know, for example, that in British Columbia and in Ontario they have not yet moved.... Well, in British Columbia there's only one retail outlet, and in Ontario there are none yet, but when those begin to open up, I remain very confident that those supply chain issues will be resolved and that Canadians will be given a better choice.
:
It's quite complex, obviously, as to why those numbers have increased, not just in Canada but all around the world in virtually every country. We've had a number of meetings with UNHCR, for example, to get an understanding of the entire global context of those who are fleeing persecution and seeking asylum.
In terms of some of the things that I believe have been quite effective, after last summer's surge when we saw a very significant increase through June, July and August of last year in the number of people who were presenting themselves irregularly at our border, there was a significant outreach that took place. We had ministers, senior officials, and even MPs who went down into those communities where many of these people were coming from to clearly explain Canadian law and how the system would work and to make it very clear that this wasn't a free ticket into the country. I think that has had a fairly profound effect.
We've also done some very effective work in online communications. We're communicating in the languages spoken in those communities. If, for example, they go out seeking information on a search engine or whatever, there is accurate, lawful information that clearly explains what the law is in Canada and how it will be applied, so people don't have misinformation that might induce them to come irregularly to our borders.
As well, and I think this has been very positive, we've been working very closely with other international authorities, particularly in the United States. It's important to acknowledge that. Some things they were doing with respect to their visa applications and authorizations and other things were having an impact on the number of people coming to us. As a result of the dialogue that has gone on between us, some very effective steps have been taken.
There's still a great deal more work to do, but we see a path of clear improvement in the number of people who are coming.
It's also important to remember that people conflate the issue of asylum seekers. Less than half—about 40%—of those who come to our country seeking asylum actually cross irregularly; 60% are crossing at a point of entry or making inland claims through the airports and so on. It's a smaller portion, and in fact, because of some very effective steps that our officials have taken, the number coming across irregularly is becoming less among the total number of asylum seekers.
Therefore, we are seeing improvements. There still is work to do.
:
I have actually had the opportunity. I've been involved in most of the large, complex gang investigations that have been conducted in this country. I was previously chief of detectives before I was the chief of police. We did most of the big gang investigations in Toronto.
I will tell you that one of the things we've learned, which I think is appropriate and really informs a lot of the work we're doing now, is that it's important to do those investigations—because some of those individuals are very dangerous and society needs to be protected from them—but if that's all you do, the problem doesn't get better. One of the things we learned is that not only did you have to go in and deal with those individuals who were committing serious violent crimes and supplying guns and drugs into the community, but you also then had to go in and change the circumstances in the community to make it less vulnerable to gang violence.
For example, after we used to go and do these big arrests and take out the gang members, we'd flood the area with uniformed cops whose job it was to go in and restore people's sense of safety and security. We worked really closely with and supported the social services agencies, the schools and the youth workers who were working in that community to build up its own resilience and its ability to protect public space. They encouraged people to come back out and use their neighbourhoods. When we did that, we saw significant and sustained reduction in violence in those communities.
I will tell you from experience that it's a lot of work. It's a great deal of work, but it's effective. If all you're going to do is kick down all the doors and drag everybody out and have very big expensive trials, the problem comes back and it comes back very quickly, but if you make that significant investment in the community and sustain support for those communities, it makes a difference and it actually has the effect.
Frankly, during my tenure we saw about a 45% reduction in gun violence, and it was a direct result of not just the interventions and investigations of the police, but stronger supports for community and for kids. That's why we advocate for those investments as well.
:
Pursuant to Standing Order 81(5), we have some votes on Supplementary Estimates (A), 2018-19.
Do I have the committee's unanimous consent to lump all the votes in the supplementary estimates together?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
CANADA BORDER SERVICES AGENCY
ç
Vote 1a—Operating expenditures.......... $85,051,922
ç
Vote 5a—Capital expenditures.......... $2,185,714
(Votes 1a and 5a agreed to on division)
OFFICE OF THE CORRECTIONAL INVESTIGATOR OF CANADA
ç
Vote 1a—Program expenditures.......... $99,196
(Vote 1a agreed to on division)
SECURITY INTELLIGENCE REVIEW COMMITTEE
ç
Vote 1a—Program expenditures.......... $99,196
(Vote 1a agreed to on division)
ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE EXTERNAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
ç
Vote 1a—Program expenditures.......... $236,162
(Vote 1a agreed to on division)
CIVILIAN REVIEW AND COMPLAINTS COMMISSION FOR THE ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE
ç
Vote 1a—Program expenditures.......... $99,196
(Vote 1a agreed to on division)
ç
Vote 1a—Program expenditures.......... $99,196
(Vote 1a agreed to on division)
ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE
ç
Vote 1a—Operating expenditures.......... $70,086,955
ç
Vote 5a—Capital expenditures.......... $23,130,497
ç
Vote 10a—Grants and contributions.......... $19,500,000
(Votes 1a, 5a and 10a agreed to on division)
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
ç
Vote 1a—Operating expenditures.......... $7,370,883
ç
Vote 5a—Grants and contributions.......... $28,312,659
(Votes 1a and 5a agreed to on division)
SECRETARIAT OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY AND INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE OF PARLIAMENTARIANS
ç
Vote 1a—Program expenditures.......... $3,278,218
(Vote 1a agreed to on division)
CANADIAN SECURITY INTELLIGENCE SERVICE
ç
Vote 1a—Program expenditures.......... $13,893,055
(Vote 1a agreed to on division)
CORRECTIONAL SERVICE OF CANADA
ç
Vote 1a—Operating expenditures.......... $2,339,766
(Vote 1a agreed to on division)