:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, colleagues, members of the committee.
[Translation]
I am pleased to be here today to discuss with you the expenditure plan of the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness for 2006-2007.
[English]
I'm pleased to be with you here today to go over public safety portfolio spending plans for the year 2006-07.
Right off the bat, I'll introduce the officials who are accompanying me today.
I'm pleased to introduce to you, many for the first time, the Deputy Minister Suzanne Hurtubise; Mr. Jim Judd, who is the head of our Canadian Security Intelligence Service, CSIS; Mr. Alain Jolicoeur, who heads up the Canada Border Services Agency; Commissioner Zaccardelli, who is in charge of the RCMP; Mr. Keith Coulter, who heads up Correctional Service Canada; and Mr. Mario Dion, who is now head of the National Parole Board. Each of those agencies falls under the umbrella of public safety.
I've said before, and I'll say many more times, I have always believed the prime responsibility of any government is the safety and security of its citizens. It's to that goal that these agency heads and almost 55,000 employees are dedicated.
The portfolio budget is $6 billion, when you take into account all these various expenses. It covers everything from providing leadership to providing coordination in terms of the agencies themselves, as well as coordination of emergency services at the federal level. Of course, the portfolio delivers programs and services in all areas related to national security, emergency management, policing, law enforcement and border security, the corrections system, and crime prevention. Integrating these closely related roles and responsibilities helps to maximize not only our emergency preparedness throughout the country to natural disasters and security emergencies, but also the very issues of safety and security upon which our citizens rely.
Public safety is a co-responsibility of government, and as recent events have shown us, terrorism is a problem to address here in our own country and in fact around the world.
Accountability is also a priority. That's why, indeed, we're looking at the expenditures that are identified in these estimates to be implemented, and I look to you for your input, your questions, and your guidance on those.
As you're aware, the government is making additional changes that will not be reflected in these particular estimates, but will be reflected in the further supplementary estimates.
Budget 2006 provides a clear indication of where the government intends to go on the whole issue in the areas of public safety and security.
[Translation]
Since taking over this portfolio, I have met with some of the men and women working in the area of public safety. I have visited correctional institutions, RCMP detachments and land border crossings. I have been to the Government Operations Centre, participated in a briefing session given by CSIS officials, and attended a demonstration of Canada's urban search and rescue capacity in Calgary.
[English]
I've had the opportunity to visit many of our various facilities related to these portfolio items and these agencies. I've visited many corrections facilities, as well as RCMP posts and key operational elements of the RCMP, from the DNA centre to our National Child Exploitation Coordination Centre, to various facilities across the country. I've spent a fair bit of time at our border entries--land, air, and sea. I've been briefed by CSIS officials, and in fact officials from all agencies, in terms of our state of preparedness both for emergencies and in dealing with the security issues that face me on a daily basis.
I'm not the only one in government, indeed, who has visited these facilities. I make those invitations open to any of you, of course. My parliamentary secretary, Mr. Dave MacKenzie, has been instrumental in assisting and advising me and also in taking a very significant role in this whole area of public safety and security.
I can say that, without exception, what I have found when I have spent time at any of these particular agencies out on the front lines is dedicated, hard-working people who believe strongly in what they're doing. They see this as important and necessary work. I'm proud to be associated with the some 55,000 employees across the country who are committed in their area of expertise to our safety and to our security.
We've taken on a number of initiatives, which I can address during the question time. I'd like to touch for a few moments on the main estimates and the highlights. This is the projected spending for the department and the portfolio agencies for 2006-07.
In terms of the department itself--this isn't the broad portfolio, but just the department itself--with some 850 full-time equivalents in the 2006-07 budget of $458 million, that's increase of 6.3%
There has also been an increase of $22.9 million for the renewal of the expanded national crime prevention strategy. That brings their total to $47.4 million.
Funding for the first nations policing program would increase by $6.3 million.
For the Canada Border Services Agency, with some 12,348 full-time equivalents in the 2006-07 budget, that will be approximately $1.3 billion. That's a 26.6% increase, reflecting our commitment to the integrity of our borders, a $271.8 million increase in funding for CBSA to improve border security by strengthening the presence at the border, to respond to the increased staff requirements resulting from the redevelopment of Pearson International Airport, and to address employee health and safety concerns and to build a solid foundation for the new agency.
In terms of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, CSIS, there are some 2,449 full-time equivalents for the 2006-07 budget of $346.1 million. That's an 18.5% increase, again reflecting our concern related to the capacity and the strength of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, $54 million of which will help CSIS to keep pace with constantly evolving technology--and as you can imagine, in the area of information gathering this is very important; as well as to enhance the service's ability to collect national security intelligence abroad; and to operate the Integrated Threat Assessment Centre.
For the RCMP, there are some 25,263 full-time equivalents. Obviously that's not all officers on the front lines; it also includes the administrative support. The 2006-07 budget of $2 billion is an increase of 11.5%, again reflecting the government's commitment to increased security on our streets, in our cities and our towns. The funds are primarily for contract policing services and the real-time identification project.
Correctional Service Canada has some 14,829 full-time equivalent employees. For the 2006-07 budget, that's $1.7 billion. That reflects an increase of 7%, $27.5 million of which is going to be for capital projects that have been delayed from previous years, and $15.7 million for two projects under the strengthening community safety and the effective corrections initiatives.
The National Parole Board has 465 full-time equivalents, and $43.1 million is allotted to them in the 2006-07 budget. That's an increase of 35.5%, $11.3 million of which is going to address some of the chronic underfunding and a growing workload, including $1.5 million for victims of crime, and $600,000 of that was provided for workload increases.
The Canada Firearms Centre has been the responsibility of this portfolio. As you know, the government has made a promise to Canadians to eliminate the long gun registry and to reinvest those savings into crime prevention, more officers on the street, programs that will assist youth, and other areas.
I also want to remind members that we were talking about bringing in the amnesty, which we've actually done. The amnesty is in place for unrestricted long guns. I know there's been a concern related to the files that are available to police officers when they are on the front lines. The requirement is still in place and will remain in place. Anyone who wants to possess or purchase a firearm must have a firearm licence of one of two sorts. You still must have a licence. That will still be a fact of life. An officer, who is pulling up to a domicile and checking on the possibility of firearms, will know if the persons resident there in fact have firearm licences. We are also maintaining the safe storage provisions and the safety course requirement. The handgun registry stays in place, as does the registry for prohibitive and restrictive weapons.
The annual operating budget for the program has been reduced by $10 million, and of course, as you know, responsibility for it is being transferred to the RCMP.
[Translation]
I will now talk about the estimates.
Security is obviously one of the government's priorities. We have announced spending of $1.4 billion over two years to protect families and communities in Canada, provide border security and improve our preparation time to deal with threats to public health.
[English]
There is $1.4 billion over two years going towards protecting Canadian families and communities, securing our borders, increasing our ability to be prepared for public health threats and other emergencies; a $161 million increase over the next two years for our commitment to hiring 1,000 RCMP officers, and $37 million for the RCMP to expand its national training academy in Regina; $101 million over the next two years to begin arming and training our border officers and to reduce instances where border officers are working alone; $303 million will be invested over two years to improve the flow of low-risk traffic of goods and people and, at the same time, targeting high-risk travellers and goods. Secure borders are a goal we will achieve, but we also want to make sure that good access for low-risk travellers and low-risk goods is also achieved. If you have security but you don't have prosperity with it, then you have failed in your goal. We plan to achieve both of those goals. There is $95 million over two years to bolster security for rail and urban transit; Transport Canada will take the lead on those.
There is $20 million for crime prevention activities that target youth at risk by providing them with positive alternatives to violence, drugs, and gangs. Victims of crime will be supported by an additional investment of $26 million. There will be $19 million per year to improve Canada's capacity to manage emergencies of all kinds; $5 million a year to enhance the national exercise and training program; and $1 million per year to fund vulnerability assessments for critical infrastructure.
[Translation]
It is vital that we continue to strengthen Canada's capacity in the areas of law enforcement, public safety, border security and emergency management in order to deal with all the security threats facing Canadians.
[English]
Mr. Chairman, it's vital that we continue to strengthen Canada's law enforcement public safety border security and emergency management capacities to deal with any and all threats to the safety and security of Canadians.
To that end, I'm respectfully asking the committee to lend its support to this spending plan. I look forward to working with you on public safety priorities, including, by the way, your consideration of the proposed emergency management act and the review of the Anti-terrorism Act.
As we look to you for questions and advice, I just want to again underline that we are served by some 55,000 employees who see safety and security provisions as a calling. They go to work every night and every day committed to the safety and security of our country.That can give us great assurance. I also feel assured by the upcoming questions and advice that I'll receive from the members on this committee.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
:
Of course not. In a democratic society, we want absolute freedom of the press at all times, and we celebrate that.
But I can tell you that each time it's raised we don't just dismiss it . First of all, there could be an individual who doesn't have full information. There may be the motivation, as there is on the political side, with pressure from constituents, to send out certain messages. In each one of those cases, calls are made either by me or, if it's a matter of foreign affairs, by Minister MacKay, right to the key individual, saying, “This has popped up again. Could you deal with it?” When we've made those calls, there's always been a degree of angst expressed by high-level officials, who have said, “We don't know. It's unfortunate that on an individual basis this continues to come out.”
Myths easily spin out. You'll recall that after the devastation, after the tragic events of 9/11, one of the first stories that came out within 24 hours was that the terrorists had crossed the border into Maine from Canada. There was absolutely no substance, not a shred of truth to that, and yet when a story like that first spins out, it grabs headlines. The correction was later made, and even the Americans corrected it and said, “No, you're right”. We reminded them that actually those people were from within their borders. They trained at their flight schools, not ours.
So it's a problem we have, Ms. Sgro. It's one that is frustrating. I met Congresswoman Slaughter, who I think at this very moment is testifying here in Canada for the Senate committee on banking. She is working with us very closely on some of the WHTI concerns. She is just as frustrated when her own counterparts come out with messages like that. She, along with her other comrades and colleagues, is going to be aggressively pursuing that.
So I'm glad you raised it. We get aggressive on it when we hear it. It is difficult to control once a misguided statement is made and then amplified by the media. Corrections are made, but it does send out a perception that just has no foundation in reality.
:
Time will tell whose figure is most accurate. The immediate savings of $10 million was identified for us by the former person in charge of the Canada Firearms Centre, Mr. Bill Baker. I think he was here. He identified at least $10 million in savings. As indicated before, the RCMP, although they haven't put an actual figure on it, will be looking for increased savings too. So when you look at our four- or five-year budget projections, a saving of $50 million is significant.
On our overall policy on the monitoring system, maintaining a part of the program that simply is not functioning correctly is an exercise in futility. I don't want to stretch the Auditor General's remarks beyond any intent she had, but when she says that data is unreliable, and when she pointed out that the computer system.... As you will recall, there was an initial system that was contracted. That system proved to be deficient, apparently. It couldn't keep up with the registrations. We're talking about registering some seven million pieces of equipment--long guns, and of course, handguns are included in that. The first system could not handle that load or, apparently, the complexity of it, so a second system was contracted. At the time of the Auditor General's report, and to this date, the second system could not accommodate what had to be done, so they went back to using the first system while paying out huge amounts of money for that second system.
By eliminating the requirement to register the unrestricted long guns, we're going to take a significant load off the system itself. I can't speak right now to the operational end if the RCMP decides to go with the original system, which is in fact being used, but whichever one they're going to use, the load is going to be significantly lighter and it will have the capability to be far more accurate with respect to the other firearms elements, the handgun registry for instance, and restricted and prohibited firearms.
Once you've taken out these other several million pieces of equipment, if you want to call them that—incidentally, the Auditor General also reflected on the verification process: is it truly this specific firearm, does it have that type of capability, and is it that calibre?—we can really focus on the area of licensing for those who want to acquire, hold, or buy firearms, and on the areas where we see the greatest increase in terms of criminal activity, homicides with handguns having gone up over the last two years.
Next year, should we still be here in this present form of government, and should the Prime Minister still deign to have me in this position, either he'll be able to look at me and say, see, it was only $3.4 million, or I'll be able to look at you and say it was $10 million plus. We'll find out then. Either way, it's a lot of money. I remember somebody saying once—and it wasn't from anybody around this table—“Well, a million dollars here, a million dollars there, pretty soon we're going to be talking about real money.” I think $1 million is a lot of money any day of the week, and $10 million is even more, and over five years, what you could do with $50 million in terms of policing and crime prevention programs is significant.
First--and I'm not suggesting your one phrase was not well intended, your comments are all well intended, and I take it that way--we are not in fact killing the gun registry. The firearms registry will be alive and well, other than the requirement to register unrestricted long guns and the requirement to continue to renew licensing. That's the only portion we're talking about.
To be honest, we've had mixed reaction from the heads of policing agencies. I don't know if I have the quotes with me, but I could send them to you. You've probably seen them; we quote them in question period from time to time. Some chiefs and others across the country are saying, good, we're glad that the long gun registry portion is being taken out of the loop; it's saves us a lot of frustration and helps us to really focus in terms of gun crime. Others have said that they wish we would leave it in place. Many of the rank-and-file frontline officers, through their various associations, have also expressed great relief that the long gun registry portion will eventually be eliminated so they can concentrate on the handguns and on restrictive and prohibitive firearms.
I guess the debate will just continue in terms of reliability of the information. It's not only the reliability of the information, but there are tens of thousands who have been unable to effectively register their long guns either because of the system not working properly or rule changes. As I think the member knows, the first amnesty that went into place, because of the inability of the system itself to be able to properly register all the information, was in 1996 or 1997. There have been a total of eight amnesty provisions, allowing more time for people to comply with the law. A law simply cannot be seen as effective if you're asking people to do something where a huge percentage of them find it virtually impossible. And the main problem has to do with the registering of the long guns. That was why it was taken out.
Affidavits will continue to be available for measuring crime with firearms. We really think that with the ability of officers now, especially those on the street and front lines being able to focus on the things they need to focus on, that's going to be a great advancement. We think you're going to see reduced crime with firearms. There will be more crime prevention programs, more resources for crime prevention, and more officers on the street. Those are the things that really go to reducing firearms.
So, Ms. Kadis--somewhat similar to my response to your colleague when we were talking about reliability of data--time will tell just how unreliable it was. Those were the comments of the Auditor General in some areas. The reliability data was questionable. A program that's not functioning well needs to be moved to the side and the resources put to true protection of our citizens and true reduction of crime with guns.