TRGO Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Standing Committee on Transport and Government Operations

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, March 19, 2002

Á

1100

The Chair (Mr. Ovid Jackson (Bruce--Grey--Owen Sound, Lib.))

Mr. Ghislain Lebel (Chambly, BQ)

Á

1105

The Chair

Mr. Lebel

The Chair

Mr. Denis Lefebvre (Assistant Commissioner, Customs Branch, Canada Customs and Revenue Agency)

Á

1110

Á

1115

Á

1120

The Chair

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

The Chair

Mr. Darrel Stinson (Okanagan--Shuswap, Canadian Alliance)

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Á

1125

Mr. Darrel Stinson

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Darrel Stinson

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Darrel Stinson

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Darrel Stinson

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Á

1130

Mr. Darrel Stinson

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

The Chair

Mr. John Cannis (Scarborough Centre, Lib.)

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Á

1135

Mr. John Cannis

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. John Cannis

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. John Cannis

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. John Cannis

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

The Chair

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Á

1140

The Chair

Mr. Reg Alcock (Winnipeg South, Lib.)

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. John Cannis

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

The Chair

Mr. Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Á

1145

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Á

1150

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

The Chair

Mr. Reg Alcock

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Reg Alcock

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Á

1155

Mr. Reg Alcock

The Chair

Mrs. Bev Desjarlais (Churchill, NDP)

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mrs. Bev Desjarlais

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mrs. Bev Desjarlais

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mrs. Bev Desjarlais

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mrs. Bev Desjarlais

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Â

1200

Mrs. Bev Desjarlais

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mrs. Bev Desjarlais

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Bev Desjarlais

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

The Chair

Mr. Alex Shepherd (Durham, Lib.)

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Â

1205

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Â

1210

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Alex Shepherd

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

The Chair

Ms. Val Meredith (South Surrey--White Rock--Langley, PC/DR)

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Â

1215

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Â

1220

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Meredith

The Chair

Mr. André Harvey (Chicoutimi--Le Fjord, Lib.)

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. André Harvey

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. André Harvey

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

The Chair

Mr. Marcel Proulx (Hull--Aylmer, Lib.)

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Â

1225

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Â

1230

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Â

1235

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Mr. Marcel Proulx

The Chair

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Val Meredith

Mr. Denis Lefebvre

Ms. Meredith

The Chair

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on Transport and Government Operations

---

NUMBER 056

l

1st SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, March 19, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Á  (1100)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mr. Ovid Jackson (Bruce--Grey--Owen Sound, Lib.)): Ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, I think I see a quorum. I'd like to start the proceedings.

    Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we're studying truckers' hours of operation, in particular problems at the borders.

    Before we start, Monsieur Lebel, I think, has three motions he wants to issue for 48 hours, so we'll deal with them on Thursday.

[Translation]

    Mr. Ghislain Lebel (Chambly, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You may recall that last Thursday, I tabled a motion inviting Mr. Brault, the President of Groupaction, to appear before this committee. However, while we were debating the motion, Mr. Szabo announced that this wouldn't be necessary, since the famous missing 1998 report by Public Works and Government Operations had been found. My colleagues opposite were undoubtedly pleased Thursday morning, as we were, that the report in question had finally turned up.

    Unfortunately, as delighted as they were Thursday morning, disappointment was clearly etched on their faces yesterday. It was particularly upsetting to me to see the dejected look on the face of the Member for Chicoutimi when he discovered yesterday that the report uncovered last Thursday was not in fact the missing report, but a photocopy of a 1999 report which hadn't been missing in the first place.

    Therefore, to rekindle their enthusiasm at this time, I would like to table at this time three motions which will be debated on Thursday. The first motion reads as follows:

That the Standing Committee on Transport and Government Operations invite the Vice-President of Groupaction Marketing, Roger Desjeans, to appear before the Committee to speak to us about the documents produced March 14 and sent to Communications Canada and to the opposition parties.

    That's my first motion. The second reads as follows:

That the Standing Committee on Transport and Government Operations invite the Director of Corporate Affairs of Groupaction Marketing, Diane Donnelly...

She was in fact the one who signed the affidavit the Minister mentioned during Question Period. This affidavit was supposed to restore this government's full credibility. Therefore, I don't imagine anyone will object to inviting Ms. Donnelly to testify.

...to appear before the committee to speak to us about the documents produced March 14 and sent to Communications Canada and to the opposition parties and about her sworn statement of March 18.

That would be the sworn statement made yesterday.

    The third motion is related to the same matter:

That the Standing Committee on Transport and Government Operations invite the former official of the Department of Public Works and Government Services, Chuck Guité, to appear before it to inform us about the contracts his department awarded to Groupaction Marketing, the content of the report on the study of ways to increase federal government visibility and the content of the report on the production of a list of 1,300 cultural events.

    These three motions target individuals who are closely associated with the history of this contract and who could shed light on this matter, in the absence of the report in question. They could enlighten committee members as to the content of the report, the method used for collecting data and the analyses carried out, since the Minister - through no fault of his own - is unable to produce the report. These witnesses could enlighten the committee and in the process, restore some of the Minister's credibility, which has suffered greatly of late, and put a smile back on the faces of my colleagues opposite. After these witnesses testify, they could then claim to know the absolute truth, or almost.

    Basically, that was the gist of my three motions. Thank you.

Á  (1105)  

[English]

    The Chair: Merci beaucoup, monsieur Lebel.

    Will you table it with the clerk, so that we have that ready?

    Mr. Ghislain Lebel: Yes.

    The Chair: We'll go on to the order of the day, which is to hear the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Monsieur Lefebvre.

    Welcome, sir. We would like to hear from you now.

[Translation]

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre (Assistant Commissioner, Customs Branch, Canada Customs and Revenue Agency): Merci beaucoup, monsieur le président.

    I'm pleased to be here today at your request to speak to you about customs. Your committee is considering certain aspects of the transportation industry of particular interest to it. I'd like to start by giving you an overview of current customs initiatives. Then, based on your questions, I can provide you with additional details.

    First of all, let me just say that at Customs, our two concurrent objectives are, firstly, the safety of Canadians, and secondly, economic security or the facilitation of the passage through customs of persons and goods. With a view to achieving these objectives, we have developed a strategy which consists of strengthening enforcement and monitoring measures at the borders so as to facilitate, in so far as possible, trade at our shared border with the United States where traffic volume, both of travellers and of goods, is greatest.

    Every day, 300,000 people cross the border into Canada. In addition, over 10,000 commercial shipments arrive at our common border. The volume of trade has increased steadily since the signing of the Free Trade Agreement with the United States. Over two years ago, we initiated a broad consultation process with all of our partners, which resulted in the launch of a customs action plan which we have been implementing for over one year now.

    Obviously, our plans and priorities were thrown into chaos by the events of September 11. Since then, we have been fast-tracking our strategy as well as our consultations with our US neighbours.

[English]

    In a nutshell, the essence of our five-year customs action plan is to use technology to facilitate the movement of people and cargo at the border and at all of our points of entry. To do that, we pre-approve. Our plan is to pre-approve low-risk cargo and people in order to enable them to quickly and easily cross the border and to move the attention of our customs officers on to people and cargo that are unknown or higher-risk.

    One of the main initiatives to do that, with respect to travellers, is what we call NEXUS. NEXUS is a program whereby travellers who are lower risk apply and are pre-approved. This is a combined initiative with the Americans whereby travellers are pre-approved. They are given a card--a way to be identified using technology at the border when they come there. When they come, they don't have to speak to a customs officer, because with a card they activate the computer that tells us who they are and that they are low risk, and we allow them to go through. That's for the shared border.

    We have very recently reached an agreement with our colleagues at Canadian Immigration and U.S. Customs and Immigration to expand our NEXUS pilot project, which has been in operation for about a year at Sarnia-Port Huron--to expand it to all the high-volume ports at our shared border, starting in B.C. in early summer.

    We will implement a similar program--for ease of reference let's call it NEXUS Air--at airports. For the moment it's just a Canadian program; the buy-in for the Americans is not a given yet. People would come in at the major airports, such as Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, and Calgary, and they would simply go to a kiosk similar to a bank machine. They would, through an iris scan, wink into the kiosk, then with their credit card pay their duties, if any duty has to be paid, and move on. This program should be operational--this is our target--by the end of the year.

    That's for people, for travellers. We have a similar program for commercial shipments. We call it CSA. We've worked on getting ready for it and we implemented customs self-assessment--CSA for short--on December 3. It basically works as follows. Low-risk importers are pre-approved as participants in CSA, because based on experience and the checks we need to make, we are satisfied their books and records and procedures will ensure that they properly comply with customs requirements.

    The carrier transporting the goods is also pre-approved. We are satisfied that it's not a fly-by-night operator, but an established carrier that will properly comply with their customs requirements. And the driver is approved as being a low-risk individual. Once those three parties in the movement of the goods have been approved, they can use dedicated lanes at the border to move their goods with a minimum of interference by Customs. We are convinced this new program will increase compliance substantially, that it is a much superior system from a security and facilitation point of view than the former transactional system could yield.

Á  (1110)  

    As part of our discussions with our colleagues in U.S. Customs, we have extolled the virtues of CSA as a system that increases both security and facilitation. They have shown a great deal of interest. We are now discussing such a program on a regular basis. There is an agreement to distinguish between low-risk and high-risk or other shipments. Now we are working on the modalities of that system. Our goal is to have it as joint as possible, because for importers, carriers, and drivers, it's much better if it's both ways, with dedicated lanes both ways.

    We already have over 20,000 commercial drivers, 165 carriers, and 15 importers that have applied on CSA. Since December 3, we have two major companies, Ford and DaimlerChrysler, that have been fully authorized to use the CSA program. Over 1,800 trucks have crossed the border under the CSA program.

    These are some of the critical initiatives we are pursuing with our colleagues in the U.S., with a view to the attainable objective of increasing security while ensuring our economic security and facilitating the movement of shipments at the border.

    We have a number of other initiatives that relate to our external borders. Those are aimed at benchmarking our procedures at seaports and airports to ensure that someone who comes into the U.S. or Canada from outside North America will basically be screened equally, whether they choose to come into Canada or the U.S. Our goal is to ensure that we facilitate as much as possible the movement between our two countries at the land border. By ensuring that our screening and procedures at external borders, which includes seaports.... We want to ensure that by giving that confidence, we are equally defending our respective countries from external people and goods. That will facilitate the movement of goods and people at our shared border.

    We also have other initiatives in the air mode where by this summer we will receive in advance, from all airlines, information about the travellers before they arrive in Canada or even before they depart, so we can as much as possible screen people before they get on planes to come here. If they're on the plane, when they land we can facilitate their movement because we know which travellers on the plane we would like to examine more closely.

    This API/PNR, advance passenger information, is something that in some circumstances we have to share with our colleagues in the U.S. to ensure our reciprocal security. We have discussions on those issues with U.S. Customs and U.S. Immigration, and of course with our colleagues in Canadian Citizenship and Immigration.

    Mr. Chairman, I think I've covered the highlights of the initiatives that are now taking place in Customs.

Á  (1115)  

    Because you are concerned with transportation, I will just add that even if we have enough PILs and the movement is very rapid, very often this will be to no avail if the pre-approved travellers and truckers who should have an easy and quick passage do not have access to the customs booth. We call the area that precedes the customs booth the plaza, which is normally much wider than the road. But if you don't have access to the customs booth or to the plaza because you're stuck behind slower traffic due to the fact that there are not enough lanes on the road, for instance, the PIL booth may be free and empty, if you wish, or it may be ready to accept you, but you may not be able to reach it.

    So there is a connection between what we do at Customs and infrastructure improvements that are required to ensure that both work hand in hand so that the movement of trade and people at the border will be smooth.

    Merci, monsieur le président.

Á  (1120)  

    The Chair: Thank you very much, Commissioner.

    Can you explain NEXUS for us before I go on to the next round of questions? What's the acronym for it?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: NEXUS is just a word in English and French, but it is not commonly used, I will concede. It's a bit of a nebulous word. The nexus is the joint, so that's why we use it at the border. It's not an acronym. It's a word that means the link.

    The Chair: I see. Thank you for that.

    Darrel, 10 minutes.

    Mr. Darrel Stinson (Okanagan--Shuswap, Canadian Alliance): I have many questions, but I'll try to stay away from.... No, maybe I won't. What's your feeling on the safety of our customs officers now that we're into this period and we're talking about speeding up the process? I have concerns about that. I went down and visited the American customs officers. They're armed and fully capable of responding on an instant's notice. But on the Canadian side there are many problems about responding. They have to phone local police detachments to come out, in many instances, to take care of what they should be allowed to take care of.

    So I was just wondering what your feeling is with regard to the powers given U.S. Customs compared with the powers given Canadian Customs. I believe that U.S. Customs takes precedence over just about everybody in the law enforcement aspect. That is one of my concerns.

    Also, when you talk about joint sharing of information between us and the Americans, what are our capabilities, and are our computers compatible? Is this information going to be stopped because we don't have the same equipment to tie in with? What organizations on the American side would you be linking with for our customs officers?

    I'll just go with those questions right now.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: On your first question, we are, of course, very concerned with the safety of our officers, and this is always one of the highest priorities. We are satisfied that our officers work in a safe environment.

    Canadian customs officers are not a police force. A customs officer, indeed, has a multifaceted role. We still collect a lot of money. We collect over $20 billion a year in GST, PST, and harmonized sales tax. We're concerned about collecting excise taxes and duties. We are also concerned about such matters as foot-and-mouth disease, meat that is tainted or from forbidden countries, cheese, dangerous materials, and toxic waste. We are also concerned about the environment. From a business point of view, we are enforcing the trade agreements to make sure that our businesses are competing on a....

Á  (1125)  

    Mr. Darrel Stinson: Should we not be concerned about them?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: I'm just saying that the role of customs officers is not just to be concerned with the criminal element. It's much wider. And because of all those facets, the role of the customs officer is different from the role of a police officer. Occasionally, yes, you have to deal with people who are potentially dangerous. That's a fact, and we have procedures and some training for them to recognize those situations and to disengage if there is danger to their health or to the health of the public.

    We have to balance this. If you were to arm 4,000 people, there is a downside to that and some risk associated with it.

    So if you put everything in balance and look at the track record, customs officers are doing a fine job. They are trained to defend themselves. Those who need it have bottles of pepper spray to ensure their personal safety is protected as much as possible.

    All in all, I think the health and safety of our officers is well protected.

    Mr. Darrel Stinson: We supply them with bullet-proof vests, don't we?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes.

    Perhaps I can take one minute. CEUDA, which is the customs officers union, would like to be a police force for a number of reasons, I suppose, because there are a lot of benefits that could come with that. They are extremely active in promoting their agenda, and they will blow up, if you wish, the police aspect. As much as possible they will reduce the role of the customs officer to the police aspect role of the customs officer. They have made a lot of noise about having guns and being more like police officers.

    We do not believe in the majority of situations that vests are required by customs officers. A few years ago when we had some trouble spots, whether it was in Oka or Cornwall or in the west, when the farmers had some...when there were some hotheads, we issued vests to our customs officers. More lately, we have made them available to them if they feel more comfortable wearing a vest. That's why we issue the vests.

    Mr. Darrel Stinson: How do Americans perceive this? As I was saying, customs officers in the United States have far more powers than customs officers in Canada, yet you're saying we're going to use these two different units, basically, Canada Customs and United States Customs, to come together in sharing of information and speeding up this process.

    If I were an American customs officer involved there, I would have great concerns in regard to the powers the Canadian customs officer has compared to the American customs officer.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Basically, we have all the customs of an American customs officer, plus. A couple of years ago we empowered our officers to enforce the Criminal Code. For instance, we intercept drunken drivers who enter into our communities. That program has been ruled out. Our people have been trained to work with local police. We also arrest people who have warrants under the Criminal Code. We retrieve children who have been abducted or--

    Mr. Darrel Stinson: That's only if people are willing to stay there while the officers respond from the local communities. If it's an hour and a half away, or two hours away--

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We do arrest people. Our people are regularly arresting people for customs infractions, or because they are drunk beyond the limit. They are arrested. We have cells and we keep them.

    I can assure you that from every vantage point--and I'm very positive about that because I have a lot of contacts with the Americans and other customs organizations in the world--Canadian Customs is viewed as one of the best, including the American customs. We are not seen by our American counterparts as being the poor cousin when it comes to customs.

    I can assure you that in many of the things I've talked to you about today, we hold our own, and most of the time we are in the lead.

Á  (1130)  

    Mr. Darrel Stinson: When I was down on the border, I went to the Canadian cubicles and I found out that they are not compatible with the main computer and that they even have to leave the cubicles to go into the main office to get information, whereas on the American side they're all compatible. They don't have to leave that cubicle.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: I don't like to be one who blows my horn too much here, but in terms of the information that is provided to the front-line officer from the databanks and all of this stuff, we are ahead by some margin vis-à-vis the American customs service for both trade and travellers.

    The Chair: Thanks, Darrel.

    Mr. Cannis.

    Mr. John Cannis (Scarborough Centre, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Lefebvre. I was going to start with something different, but you just prompted me to really go into my questions and comments in a different way, because you just said, in your closing statement, that we are ahead of the U.S. in most ways. I believe that's what you said.

    In picking up what my colleague Darrel said, you also said that Canadian Customs are viewed as one of the best, even according to the U.S. Given what happened September 11, of course, it turned a lot of things around for not just North America but around the world, as I'm sure you'll agree.

    You mentioned earlier on in your statement, and I quote, that it “turned our notions and priorities around”. I say this respectfully because I believe you and the entire organization, anything that's called Canada, really care to prioritize and make sure we have a safe, secure environment for our citizens, those who come in to visit us and those who go out. What I found unacceptable is, first of all, saying we're turning our notions and priorities around. I think any ordinary individual hearing this outside would say, what were our notions before?

    Second, if I may pick up on that, you confirm my feelings about this whole knee-jerk reaction that occurred after September 11 when we had all this cacophony, if I may say, coming from the U.S. For example, I had some government representative in Texas, who doesn't even know where the border is or where Ontario is, making some obnoxious statements, when they have to depend on the West Wing to see if Vermont borders Ontario, as an example. We had to react, and rightfully so.

    It seems to me that we've been reacting much faster, much better, technology-wise, than anybody, because we're already implementing this technology you talked about and the United States is not. People very quickly forget that most of these terrorists who we now are dealing with were in the U.S.; they were living there for years, being trained there, etc.

    I'm not here to throw the blame on the U.S. or Canada. I think we're trying to find means and ways to improve our security. When you talk pre-approving, etc., I'm all for that, but the question is that in the U.S. they're not even doing as much as we are, if I'm picking up your comments correctly. Can you reconfirm that for me? It seems we've moved further ahead because of their aggressive comments, which we've been following on CNN and what have you. We've really been very proactive, it seems to me.

    Is that what I'm reading from you, that we've been much more proactive in our initiatives here in Canada than they have been in the U.S.? Am I correct?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: I will try to respond this way. Prior to September 11, we had already agreed on the customs action plan, which had CSA, which was a smarter way and a safer way and a faster way to move goods. And we already had CANPASS in southern Ontario, B.C., and Lacolle, and we had a pilot project called NEXUS with the Americans.

    When I said we shifted our priorities around, one thing that is obvious is that the government gave us, in the last budget, $433 million to give better access even to our front-line officers to all the back-end information we have that can identify risk; to buy some new technology--more ion scans, better state-of-the-art X-rays, gamma rays, and that sort of technology; and also more people, especially at ports, seaports and airports, to ensure that we defend our external borders against external risk.

    So in that sense of priorities we have expanded and accelerated programs that were already in the works, but we have given them quite a jolt.

Á  (1135)  

    Mr. John Cannis: Since we've had the agreement with the U.S., as you pointed out, have those programs, too, been accelerated there as we have accelerated them here? Can you comment on this?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes, I can.

    Mr. John Cannis: I'm not here, Mr. Chairman, picking on the U.S. I'm just trying to balance things out.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: In December, Deputy Prime Minister Manley and Governor Ridge agreed on a 30-point action plan. Many of the points in the action plan are border related. We are leading on eight of the items at the agency and have made some very good progress with our colleagues in the U.S.

    NEXUS is an example. We have agreed to implement NEXUS across the border at all high-volume points, starting in B.C. When I say it will be operational in early summer, it means we are starting to implement the process right now.

    Also, we have had some very fruitful discussions on the CSA order--the joint management of trade for low-risk and other. We are making some very good progress in this regard.

    Mr. John Cannis: This is my last question, Mr. Chairman.

    You talked about the card-activated information program. You said that for the moment it's only a Canadian program. Was this part of the agreement with the U.S.?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: No, I'm sorry, the card-activated computer is the technology we agreed with the U.S. to use with NEXUS members. We would give them what we call a proximity card that activates the screen for the customs officers so they know that members are part of the program.

    Mr. John Cannis: But it's only Canadians using it so far. The Americans have not.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: No, actually we started a pilot project in November 2000 in Sarnia-Port Huron. We agreed then to test two technologies. We went with just a picture card. They went with the proximity card--a medium-level technology that we had agreed on.

    It went well. We had an evaluation paid for by the four agencies involved in the pilot. The evaluation recommended the proximity card as the better option. We agreed with this, so we are going to implement this type of technology.

    The Chair: Would you just explain this comment? Some members seem puzzled by your proximity card.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: With the proximity card, each member in a vehicle has been pre-approved as a low risk. They each have been issued a card with a chip in it. When the vehicle approaches the PIL, the primary inspection line, they take out their card in the car, without having to swipe it against anything. They just put it in the car where they are sitting and this will activate their picture on the screen, along with any information the customs officer needs to know about those individuals. Then they can just go. They don't have to talk to the customs officer.

Á  (1140)  

    The Chair: All right, Reg, we'll put one in your ear for you.

    Mr. Reg Alcock (Winnipeg South, Lib.): Would you put those into airports--please.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Starting in December 2002 there will be cards and booths in airports that will enable entry into Canada without the need to get in line to see a customs officer. We'll put in as many booths as the traffic demands. Then people can just go through the booth with their cards, basically clearing themselves at customs.

    Mr. John Cannis: I'm sorry, I have a problem with this.

    Are you saying to me, sir, that, with this proximity card, if I'm the driver, I can hold it up at a 100-yard distance, for example, and it activates and puts on the screen that I'm supposedly...? But what happens if, two miles before a car gets to the border, the drivers are switched and the person who is supposedly honest is not who's driving?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: You still stop.

    Mr. John Cannis: Oh, you stop.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: You stop. There will be dedicated lanes. When you come to plaza, a sign will say “NEXUS Lanes Here”. You go there and as you go through you stop, just as you would stop in your neighbourhood, with the cards of all the travellers out. There is eye contact and then they wave you through.

    Mr. John Cannis: Excellent.

[Translation]

    The Chair: Mr. Laframboise.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise (Argenteuil--Papineau--Mirabel, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    You must be an expert on the subject, Mr. Lefebvre. Most likely you're familiar with the border crossing at Lacolle. From a time standpoint, can you tell me what kind of delays truckers encountered - those who had CSA approval as well as those who did not - on the following dates: September 1, that is prior to the events of 9-11; October 1; December 1 and March 1. What was the average delay encountered by truckers? Can you answer that question?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes. Generally speaking, at Lacolle, as at all other points of entry into Canada, the service standard is 10 minutes for travellers during the week, and 20 minutes on weekends. As a rule, we comply with these service standards which act as a tool for local managers when the time comes to hiring personnel. When we are unable to meet these standards, questions arise and various options are considered, such as adding new staff.

    In my opinion, things were going well at Lacolle prior to September 11. I'm not saying that there were no delays of any kind, but the situation was acceptable. For several days after September 11, the situation was chaotic. Fortunately, however, that didn't last long. Over the next few weeks, there continued to be problems on both sides of the border, but particularly on the US side because their concerns were greater than ours.

    The situation has been back to normal for quite a while now. I have no reason to believe that the delays encountered at Lacolle are unreasonable. Right away on September 13, we set up a web site. Users of these border crossings can log on to the CCRA site to find out about the delays at each entry point. We have been updating the information on the site every three hours since then, to keep travellers informed. On looking at the comments on this web site, which also covers Lacolle, I would have to say that the delays encountered are reasonable.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: I'm talking about the transportation of goods. You're telling me that as far as the truckers are concerned, whether they have CSA status or not, things are back to the way they were before September 11.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: That's right, and the volume of goods being transported is considerable. I mentioned some delays, but this is related to volume as well. Until recently, truck and passenger traffic was down from pre-September 11 levels. The events of September 11 are not necessarily to blame for the downturn. The overall economy has declined somewhat in recent months.

    According to current observations, truck traffic is more or less equivalent to the pre-September 11 volume. Nationwide, passenger traffic is still down slightly.

Á  (1145)  

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: And delays are similar to what they were prior to September 11.

    I have a second question for you. Obviously, one of the measures you recommend is making improvements to road infrastructures. You've been allocated a budget for improving road infrastructures at the border, or at least some funding was allocated for that purpose in the last budget. Were you involved in the needs assessment process? Did you analyze the needs identified? Did you participate, along with Transport Canada, in the needs analysis process and are the funds earmarked in the budget in line with your expectations?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Regarding road infrastructures, we participate in the needs analysis process because we want to see a coordinated effort between customs and provincial and other transportation companies which are concerned about this issue. We want to see a coordinated effort in this area. We want to ensure an active presence and make them aware of our actions. However, this is not our specific area. We're not the ones with the funding, so I would like to refer the committee to the parties who are more knowledgeable that I am about this matter.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: Except, what you're telling us is that while you may have specific needs or specific recommendations to make, you weren't consulted to see whether planned initiatives meet your needs. It would be a good idea for Transport Canada to consult with you on such matters.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: I'm saying that consultations have taken place.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: But there hasn't been much in the way of consultations, wouldn't you agree?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We do consult with them and, as progress is made...I think we have a good relationship on all levels, from a coordination standpoint, with Transport Canada and with our other partners.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: However, you were not given a work plan. You have no idea of what's going to happen.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Some initiatives are in the works, but we don't know the specifics.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: You stated initially that a plan had been developed prior to the events of September 11. In fact, that plan had been drawn up 18 months earlier. Did I understand you correctly?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: As I recall, the plan was launched in April 2000. It listed 18 specific initiatives to be taken over a period of five years, including the introduction of CSA, CANPASS and so forth. However, before launching the plan in April 2000, we consulted with all stakeholders, including brokers, importers, transportation companies, railroads, shippers, the tourism industry - in other words, with everyone. All stakeholders supported the plan.

    We even prioritized our initiatives carefully, after consulting fully with the transportation companies and everyone else involved.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: Did you consult your US neighbours? Was the plan developed in...?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: No. Obviously, they were aware of the plan. We kept them informed about what was happening, but I can't say that the plan was a joint effort.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: Then the plan wasn't drawn up at their request or because they were pressuring you in some way.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: No.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: Nor did you feel the need to consult them. You acted unilaterally.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We kept them apprised of developments and...

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: But you didn't consult with them.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Generally speaking, we consulted them on certain initiatives. For example, our plan called for the introduction of a pre approval system for low-risk travellers and we suggested that they operate a joint program such as NEXUS. It was our initiative, but we worked with the US on setting up a pilot project which was launched in November 2000. Measures set out in the initiative applied to travellers on both sides of the border.

    We also held discussions with US officials on the proposed customs self-assessment program, or CSA. However, this was a Canadian initiative set out in our plan...

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: Except that in the case of NEXUS...

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: ...with Canadian stakeholders.

Á  (1150)  

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: Earlier, you told us that the Americans had not recognized NEXUS.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: No. I said that our customs plan released in April 2000 called for a pre approval system for low-risk travellers. They would receive a pass and special lanes would be set aside for them at the border. Our plan calls for the implementation of this initiative.

    Working within the framework of the common border agreement, we discussed with the Americans that advisability of instituting a joint regime for low-risk travellers, one that would involve setting aside special lanes for travellers with CSA cards arriving at the Canadian border. They agreed to launch a pilot project. It proved successful since the Americans have now agreed to extend the NEXUS system to all border crossings.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: When was the pilot project launched?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: In November of 2000.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: With the consent of the Americans.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: The program, which is operated jointly by US Customs and Immigration and Canada Customs and Immigration, is in place at the Sarnia, Port Huron border crossing.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: Was the program launch date moved forward in the wake of September 11, or was the program already in effect at that time?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Our pilot project was launched in November 2000. On September 11, the program was suddenly put on hold so that the situation could be assessed. On December 21, the pilot project resumed, with the endorsement of both parties. At the last meeting with US Customs and Immigration officials in Vancouver, agreement was reached to extend NEXUS to all ports of entry along the border where traffic volume so warrants.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: I have one last question. The $433 million budget covers additional staff assigned to your organization. Does this satisfy your agency's demands in every respect?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes.

[English]

    The Chair: That's your last question. And what is your last answer, quickly?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Oui.

    The Chair: Okay.

    We'll move then to Mr. Alcock.

    Mr. Reg Alcock: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I was interested in this issue of the cooperation on the other side. The question comes up all the time. We are just two countries in this relationship with a very large border and we both spend very large amounts of money doing this.

    The question about increasing harmonization at the border keeps being raised all the time. Can you give me a sense of whether there are some concerns around harmonization other than the emotional ones about sovereignty that I suspect are present? Are there some technical problems with it? Are there substantive technical issues that would prevent us from going further to harmonize and use the resources more efficiently along this border and allow us to refocus our security efforts on the perimeter, or is it more a matter of will?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Well, I mentioned NEXUS and CSA as two initiatives where we are harmonizing. For travellers using NEXUS, there will be one registration centre at the port of entry where Canadians or Americans can go to give their information. If they are approved, they will be issued one card that works both ways.

    It's a totally joint program. We agree on who's a low risk and we allow them to go through dedicated lanes with the same technology. This is one example of a very harmonized system that in our view moves people smarter and more securely but at the same time with more facilitation.

    CSA is exactly the same thing for goods. We have already agreed that, for non-CSA, importers will have to provide standard elements with the same compatible technology within the same lead time. We are very close to having a totally harmonized program on low risk. It's not complete yet, but within the next several months we hope to have a harmonization for non-low risk as well. For both goods and people the processing at the shared border will be very similar.

    Mr. Reg Alcock: I missed a piece on NEXUS, I'm sorry. Is it open to all citizens or is it simply for people travelling for business purposes?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: The fine details are not necessarily all nailed down, but essentially we have agreed that it will be available to all citizens of both countries, all permanent residents of both countries, with the caveat that we will check the last five years of residency.

Á  (1155)  

    Mr. Reg Alcock: But for the average citizen whose nationality is clear....

    Okay. That's fine. Thank you.

    The Chair: Bev.

    Mrs. Bev Desjarlais (Churchill, NDP): I'm trying to get my head around how this is going to work too. The driver has to be pre-approved, and the carrier as well as the importer and the shipper. Everyone throughout the whole process is pre-approved.

    Is this all recorded on one card, or are there cards to scan through for each and every part of that process? Maybe I'm just too pessimistic, but is it possible for a card to be nabbed so someone else uses it? We all know there are wonderful masks of the Prime Minister and others around these days. Exactly how secure is this system?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: There are 110 million people who come into this country, 300,000 a day, and about 11 million shipments. That's about 40,000 big trucks a day. So I think it is impossible to be totally certain about what's coming into the country. Traditionally we had a transactional system. You show up at the border, even if you work across and you come every day, and you are presenting yourself as if it was the first time, every time, for years.

    What we're saying is that we have to work smarter. Rather than approve each transaction, what we approve is the company, their processes, their security measures, their commitment at the highest level to comply. Of course there are some penalties and some risk of losing your privilege if you abuse it. Given the volume we have to deal with, we think it's a much more secure way than any alternative method now existing.

    Mrs. Bev Desjarlais: Say the company is pre-approved and you're expecting a certain shipment. I could be wrong, but I'm assuming that once a shipment leaves the company, it's sealed so that something else can't happen with the shipment. I'm making that assumption, but I don't know if that's part of the process. Say the vehicle was hijacked and the driver changes. Are there ways of picking up along the way?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: The technology is evolving extremely fast. As it becomes feasible, we're talking about transponders that can beam to you more information, including a picture of the driver. We have proximity cards now for NEXUS. So it's evolving very fast. As the technology gives us the means to be more and more secure and certain about things, in an affordable way, we will. But sometimes the technology is prohibitive, given the numbers we're dealing with, so we have to have a balance between security and facilitation.

    Mrs. Bev Desjarlais: What, if anything, is the cost of the approval process for the driver, the carrier, the shipper, the importer? Is there a cost for the approval process?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Thus far, we don't charge.

    Mrs. Bev Desjarlais: Is there a plan to charge? If so, what type of cost are you looking at?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: For the drivers, the plan is to charge for NEXUS. It's basically a nominal amount. If we charge for NEXUS travellers, the question of whether to charge for drivers will arise, but it will not be a high amount. The current plan is to charge not even the whole cost of doing it.

    Mrs. Bev Desjarlais: What is the whole cost of doing it?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We are putting in place new systems across the country. It's difficult.... For instance, CSA is a revolutionary way of doing customs work.

  (1200)  

    Mrs. Bev Desjarlais: I acknowledge that. What's the cost?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: I'll tell you the cost of everything we do. When we launched the customs action plan, the government gave us $100 million. That was for CSA, NEXUS, EPPS, or expedited passenger processing at airports, etc. It was to put information from all the databanks into the hands of our customs officers at the front line in a very integrated way. In December, the government gave us another $433 million.

    Mrs. Bev Desjarlais: So we're at $533 million.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: But if you look at the spread of initiatives, it's quite broad. For something like CSA, we had to train our officers, we had to develop and install the technology, software, hardware. So there are some costs.

    Mrs. Bev Desjarlais: So basically you're saying that for the security system at the border for shippers, importers, and carriers, so far the cost of the equipment and technology is $533 million?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: It's over a period of five or six years. We started in 2000, and that budget was five years out. That also includes additional officers at airports and seaports, and contraband detection technology.

    Ms. Bev Desjarlais: You probably don't know this, but is it possible the airport security tax is offsetting the cost of security at our borders?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: No. We do not have access to the airport security tax.

    Mrs. Bev Desjarlais: The government does.

    Okay, thank you.

    The Chair: Mr. Shepherd.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd (Durham, Lib.): You said you had something like 20,000 drivers using this CSA system now.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: There are 20,000 who have applied.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: “Have applied.” So they haven't received a card. Is that correct?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: I think there are 6,000, or something like that, who have been approved. Some have been approved but have not picked up their card. They're in various.... It only started in December.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: I wasn't very clear about the infrastructure at the border. Do they have to catch up with this process? You talked about the lines. Can those 6,000 truckers now get access to this fast-through process? Is that what's happening now?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes. We only have at the present time--again, it started only on December 3--two importers who are CSA approved. The drivers are only going through the CSA-dedicated lanes when they are transporting goods for a carrier who is CSA approved and an importer who is CSA approved. That's how we have 1,800 trucks that cross bridges or tunnels--basically all in southern Ontario at the present time--for Ford and Chrysler on CSA since December 3.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: So Ford and Chrysler are the only approved companies at this time?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes. We expect quite a few more within the next eight weeks.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: How do I go about getting approval? Do I have to list all my drivers? Do I have to tell you how I hire people?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We've worked with the importing community and the trucking community quite extensively for the last two years, so all the rules to become CSA approved are there. We have 15 importers who have applied. They are in various phases of approval, and many of them will become operational within the next eight weeks. People out there know what is required, and we have teams out there who will work with companies and make sure the importers are ready to come on CSA. Again, it's a very different way to do your customs work.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: If I'm an importer, I don't necessarily use my own vehicles. I contract out to other operators.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: The carriers see this as a competitive advantage. They want to become CSA approved, because then they can offer their services to importers and say “I am CSA approved. My drivers are CSA approved. Give me the contract.”

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: Now, the CSA approval--I'm assuming there's a trucking company running out of Memphis, Tennessee, that wants to bring Ford products into Canada--do you do that approval?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: The Americans don't do it?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: No, the Americans are not on this program yet. We have more or less agreed to join forces and have a joint program. Once that happens, we will have joint approval of carriers. But thus far they are Canadian approved only.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: Okay, let me get back to the basics. I'm assuming you must check the criminality of people who are driving those trucks.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: Do you do that through the U.S. State Department somehow?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We have access to U.S. police databanks.

  (1205)  

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: You talked about risk and presumably low-risk carriers. I presume you're saying car parts are considered a low-risk item. Maybe exporting dynamite is not--or herbicides, or something. Have you gone through that kind of risk assessment?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: At the border, we administer statutes for a lot of other departments. We are there at the border, but we enforce laws on health, food, animals, all kinds of things--toxic waste, dangerous goods. For the moment, CSA is limited to what I will call widgets. We don't have high-risk commodities that can be CSA at the present time. All the truckers and importers who are involved in commodities that need the approval of another department, such as Health's food and drugs branch, cannot be on CSA for the moment.

    It could be that Agriculture or the Food Inspection Agency may develop a relationship with an importer where they have the degree of trust to say, “That person is compliant; we're satisfied he could move on CSA”, and eventually we could get there. But for the moment it's limited to widgets.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: For the 40,000 trucks going back and forth, does it include widgets and animals?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: It's the total number of trucks crossing the border every day. Not all of them are eligible to become CSA approved; maybe 70% are.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: If I'm trucking cattle or agricultural products, am I going to be eligible for this?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: No, not for the moment. Until the Food Inspection Agency decides, the company would have to come and play with this. For the moment, it's approved by Customs. It's for people who do not have products that have to be approved or inspected by other agencies.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: Okay. You talked about the proximity card for individuals presumably being in place by December, I think you said. I can fly. I'm flying from wherever into Canada.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: I go up to Customs and show this card. Do I have to make a declaration?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes. It will be like a bank teller machine. If you exceed your exemption, you will be able to pay with your credit card.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: I see. You're saying if I have nothing to declare, I flick the card.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: You will have to wait for airports, because you can do it at airports. At land borders, biometrics is something else. At airports, we will ask people to give us an iris scan when they come. People come from overseas and all over the place. It's high risk. We need a biometric to make sure it's the right individual and to corroborate the documents. We will have an iris scan at airports.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: As an individual, how do I get one of the cards?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We will start receiving applications probably in the early fall.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: It gives consent for you to look at our criminal records and all that kind of thing.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: You can't tell whether people brought something into the country illegally. I guess it's recorded somewhere if you've had customs problems.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: First of all, if you had a customs infraction, you may not be approved. Secondly, people on the program will always be subject to random inspection to ensure the integrity of the program.

  (1210)  

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: How far do you go back? You said five years.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: That's for residency.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: It's to determine residency.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes. For instance, if you've been a permanent resident for three months, you may not get our approval on NEXUS. If you've been a permanent resident of Canada for five years and we know your employer, we have the means to ascertain you are low risk.

    Mr. Alex Shepherd: I guess the only comment I have is that the so-called terrorists were in the United States for something like five years. Would they be eligible for cards?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We can only know about what is known. If nothing is known, we don't find it.

    The Chair: Okay.

    Val.

    Ms. Val Meredith (South Surrey--White Rock--Langley, PC/DR): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I'm really delighted to hear what you've had to say. I think it's about time.

    I'm interested to know what you mean by “early summer”. Are you going to get NEXUS up and running before the summer rush hour, when we have four- or five-hour lineups at the border in B.C.? Is it possible?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: I have instructions to make it happen by June. I have given instruction to have at least one person in June who goes through NEXUS in B.C. I'm a bit facetious here. The truth is it will be very difficult, but we hope to have it by July or perhaps late June.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Good. We may have it by summer. There was some concern. Of course, we've had the CANPASS program. I know it didn't have quite the same degree of security. I can see why we will now be having NEXUS.

    There was a concern raised. The CANPASS program, of course, was $25 initially. Then when it was realized that the government was making more money than the cost of the program, they reduced it to zero. There was no cost for Canadians to buy the CANPASS program.

    The number that's been floating out there is $125 for the NEXUS program at a cost per individual for the card. Is it in the ballpark of what you were referring to as “some of the cost”?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: First of all, we cancelled the fees in B.C. because we believe strongly that we need large numbers of people to buy into those programs if they are to be successful. It does not make sense, from a customs management point of view, to have dedicated lanes. We are devoting officers there who could be elsewhere. Other people are waiting and there's no one.

    We need a massive buy-in. We started CANPASS about a year ago in southern Ontario. We really wanted to relieve the congestion there and do a better job, so we dropped the fee. But there are some very substantial investments that need to be made, in running the registration centres, running the safety checks, and installing proximity cards. The $25 did not even cover the costs, but we wanted it to be very attractive.

    We are talking about probably less than $125 per individual. We're also looking at whether it's necessary now, because of the developing technology, to have a renewal every year. So the fee can be influenced by the number of years for which you are accepted. It can cut the fee in half. But it should be less than that.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Following up on that, tens of thousands of people belong to that CANPASS program. When is the process going to start for registering those individuals, if this is to be up and running in the summer, so the clearances and all that can be done?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We will probably reopen the registration centers in early May.

    Just 10 days ago we agreed on the broad-brush principles with the Americans. Now we have to develop the application card and agree on all the criteria in detail. You will be able to go to a registration center on the U.S. side. You'll be able to go to just one place. Then you'll be interviewed by one officer on the other side and receive your card. But we need a few weeks to iron out all the details, so May should be the day.

  (1215)  

    Ms. Val Meredith: I agree wholeheartedly that we have to move in that direction, but if that kind of process is going to be effective, the information you are collecting has to be shared broadly. I mean that in terms of law enforcement officers, customs officers, and immigration officers on both sides of the border.

    Is that going to happen, and will this screening process be done with all those agencies coordinated?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Absolutely.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Good.

    Will you provide the customs action plan to the committee, so we can all get copies of that?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Indeed. It will be my pleasure.

    Ms. Val Meredith: You were talking about a change in your perspective on putting more resources on the external border entry points--the airports and seaports. How many staff members do you have at the seaports and airports right now?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: I cannot answer that question, offhand.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Is it something you see expanding? As part of this process, will you be putting more customs officers at seaports? I guess I'm really interested in the seaports at this time.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: The answer is yes. As part of the $433 million, a certain amount will be for additional staff at seaports and airports. It's linked to additional technology.

    There are a lot of conspiracies around airplanes and airports. Now we have the legal authority to have customs zones around aircraft, so we can control the access of maintenance people, caterers, and so on, to arriving aircraft and air travellers. We can inspect on egress. We need more people to perform those functions, for instance.

    Ms. Val Meredith: So you are beefing up the seaports as well.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes.

    Ms. Val Meredith: With your NEXUS program and the other program, CSA--

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: CSA, customs self assessment.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Right. You talked about not being able to control the infrastructure issues, that that's sort of out of your purview. Have you at least identified where the infrastructure failures are or the inefficiencies are, so that somebody else can deal with it? Have you done an assessment of the requirements for all your border crossings--I would even include seaports and airports in that--in order to facilitate a greater flow of traffic, container traffic and whatnot?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: From our end we are engaged in modelling some ports to see what arrivals can influence the traffic flow, but a bridge is a bridge is a bridge. Whether there's a customs station there or not, a bridge can be a bottleneck. So the issue is about infrastructure, in southern Ontario in particular and in B.C. in terms of highways; that is far beyond Customs to deal with. It is about traffic flow at any place.

    So we do our role modelling and we share this with all of the agencies, but we are also participating in the work of other agencies on infrastructure, just to connect what we do with what others do.

    Ms. Val Meredith: I guess for now my final question...I'm trying to think. At La Croix, you said the traffic flow has almost returned to normal. Is that typical of all the land border crossings?

  (1220)  

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes. They have been quite normal for some time, except that, for the moment, the number of travellers is still down somewhat. Truck traffic is about the same as it was prior to September 11.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Somewhat. It was down, I believe, 30% just after 9/11.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Now it's about 8% to 10%.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Is that standard across the continent?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes. Oh, there may be exceptions. You can add the tunnel in Windsor. There are more changes in a few places, but it's pretty standard.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    The Chair: Mr. Harvey, then Marcel Proulx after that.

[Translation]

    Mr. André Harvey (Chicoutimi--Le Fjord, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I'd like to thank the witness for his very excellent and timely presentation. On listening to him this morning, it became clear that some people tried to label us as a Third World country during the initial panic phase - which was quite understandable - that followed the September 11 attack.

    Have you had a chance to assess just how disappointed your department was on seeing such charges levelled against it and on seeing the impression the North American public appeared to have of the service we provide?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: I think our staff responded appropriately after September 11. As I said, we process 300,00 people through customs every day. In the months since September 11, I have not received any complaints from Canadians or foreigners crossing the border that customs officials were either too harsh or too lax in going about their job. My sense is that the Canadian public reacted positively to the efforts of workers at border points and at airports.

    Mr. André Harvey: One last thing, Mr. Chairman. Would it be possible to get a breakdown of the $433 million allocated in the budget?

    Obviously, this sum is part of the overall $7.2 billion invested by the government in security related initiatives.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: That's correct. This sum is part of the $7 billion to be invested over a certain number of years. I will be happy to provide you with a breakdown and details of where this money will be spent.

    Mr. André Harvey: Between 30 per cent and 32 per cent of this $7 billion will be generated directly by the airport tax. However, the remainder will be derived from overall government revenues. Therefore, in my view, the call for a certain balance to be struck between moneys invested by users and general government funds earmarked for security related matters has been heeded.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Passengers covered by the NEXUS agreement will incur some charges. We will recover a portion of the fees paid in part to airports by users and the latter will benefit from this arrangement. The remainder of the amount will come from Consolidated Revenue Fund.

[English]

    The Chair: Are you finished, André?

    Mr. André Harvey: Oui. Merci.

    The Chair: Marcel.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx (Hull--Aylmer, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Translation]

    Good day, Mr. Lefebvre and welcome to this committee. Thank you for coming. Like my colleague, I too would like to thank and congratulate you. Your responses and the message they convey inspire confidence in us. We truly have the impression that you are completely on top of the situation and this will help committee members get to the heart of the matter and in the process, save us a lot of time as well.

    I'd like to focus on two or three areas in particular. You stated that the system designed to facilitate the entry into the country of frequent travellers such as business travellers will result in user costs? What kind of costs are we talking about, Mr. Lefebvre?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We're talking about a fee that would not discourage frequent travellers from signing up for the program. While the program will provide a number of benefits, it will also involve substantial start-up costs. The technology must be put in place, travellers will need to be registered and the necessary reliability checks conducted. Initial costs will therefore be substantial.

    The fees charged will be reasonable and we hope they will be perceived as such. They must also be reasonable in the eyes of Americans, which complicates matters. After all, this program involves two US and two Canadian departments.

  (1225)  

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Are we talking about an annual registration fee or about something more along the line of user fees?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: The amount would not be tied to the number of transactions. It would be in the range of $50 for one, two or three years.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Then it would be somewhat like an annual registration fee.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: That's correct.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Now then, how much time will travellers be saving as a result of this program and the new measures that will be introduced?

    Let me give you example, just for your information. Recently, on February 21, I arrived at Pearson Airport at 7:50 p.m. on a Lufthansa flight. I'm not sure how many other flights landed at the same time as ours, but there was a crowd of people waiting to clear customs. I would imagine that there were between 600 and 700 people in line. Fortunately, my plane was one of the first to land, and I was twelfth or fifteenth in line. However, I experienced the same fate as always seems to befall me at McDonalds when I get into a line where a new cashier happens to be on duty. It took me exactly 42 minutes to pass through the customs desk, only to have a little red tag stapled to my card. I concluded that because of my passport, which is clearly identified, I was likely going to be searched.

    Another 30 minutes passed. So, in total, one hour and twelve minutes elapsed before I could claim my luggage at the carousel. Then, believe it or not, I had to line up again to exit this area. Another 15 minutes went by before an official could scrutinize my little red tag. To make a long story short, I missed my connecting flight to Ottawa and had to wait for a later flight.

    I wouldn't have objected if it hadn't taken me over an hour to get through these various checkpoints. No one searched me and no one asked me any unusual questions. I didn't make any false declarations and I wasn't importing anything illegal. Is this kind of delay considered normal and is the situation likely to change? Had I been enrolled in the program you're proposing, would I have saved any time? In your estimation, how much time would I have saved?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: First of all, in Canada, it's not unusual for a person to have to wait for his or her luggage after going through customs. As a rule, passengers clear Canadian customs fairly quickly. However, at larger airports, if two flights are delayed or if a number of airplanes land at the same time, it's impossible to assign enough staff to deal with the influx of passengers. Delays inevitably occur.

    If our program CANPASS Air were up and running at airports... Again, we'll have to wait and see, but there could be more than one wicket set up for travellers. It's similar to what happens when boarding passes are issued. Hopefully, there will be enough wickets open to process all passengers. The economics of the whole arrangement will come into play. Will there be enough wickets for all of the arriving passengers?

    We're hoping that many frequent travellers will sign up for the program, and we'll try to have as many wickets as possible open for them so that they can clear customs very quickly. It's much like when passengers obtain their own boarding pass. The very same principle applies.

  (1230)  

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Could the same reasoning be applied in the case of truckers at border crossing points? As I'm sure you know, when a trucker waits for hours at a border point, the issue, according to the truckers, is lost productivity and hours of work. Just because a trucker is delayed for two hours at a border point doesn't mean he'll stop for the night two hours earlier.

    To what extent are you hoping to shorten the delays truckers usually encounter at border crossing points? I'm not taking about exceptional cases where truckers encounter all kinds of problems, but about the delays experienced by truckers who have regular runs.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: First of all, the lineups at the Canadian border are not that long. However, I will admit that exceptional circumstances do arise at all border crossing points. Generally speaking, however, truckers do not encounter excessive delays at the border when crossing into Canada.

    The situation on the American side of the border is much better than it was...

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Excuse me, but what do you mean by “not unreasonable”? Our colleague opposite informs us that at border crossing points in British Columbia, the wait is terrible.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: It's not like this happens 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It's possible to know in advance that as of 3 p.m., or Monday morning, from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., the lineups are longer because everyone arrives at the same time. There are only so many booths staffed by customs workers, but during peak periods...The situation is the same in British Columbia and elsewhere. Generally speaking, however, the wait isn't terribly long.

    Depending on the port of entry, a trucker may also have a different perspective. For example, he might not mind a 20-minute wait when arriving from Mexico at the Coots border crossing point, because he just spent three days on the road. However, if a trucker must cross the bridge at Detroit eight times a day, a 20-minute delay may seem unreasonably long.

    Therefore, it's all somewhat relative. Generally speaking, however, the wait for truckers and other travellers to enter Canada is not excessive.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: What is the average delay encountered by travellers? Are we talking about minutes, or hours?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Normally, the wait is only two or three minutes, nothing at all really.

    Often, I sit down to watch the trucks cross over in southern Ontario or at Lacolle. Most of the time throughout the day, it takes them less than five minutes, but occasionally and exceptionally, the wait can be two hours.

    I have to tell you that importers like the idea of CANPASS and the CSA Program because of the associated benefits. Ultimately, they like the accounting aspect of the initiative. However, they also appreciate the benefits of CSA at the border itself and the certainty it provides. Often when a truck arrives at the border, the driver is told to pull over into a secondary lane where he may wait for 40 minutes or one hour car before his papers are checked or his truck inspected.

    As a CSA member, a trucker enjoys greater certainty that he will arrive at his destination on schedule.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Without having to pull over into a secondary lane.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: On the other hand, each port of entry has different infrastructure problems. At Lacolle, for example, there are more booths, including ones specifically set aside for CSA members. Perhaps if they encounter a three-mile stretch of unpaved road, then they can go in that line. Do you understand what I'm saying? It's the same at Pac Highway. In the case of a bridge, traffic may be blocking the way to the customs booth.

    Therefore, different situations arise, depending on the point of entry.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Mr. Lefebvre, are you in charge of the duty deferral program?

  (1235)  

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Has this program been adversely affected, so to speak, by new concerns that have arisen in the wake of the events of September 11?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Not at all.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Absolutely nothing has changed.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: No, absolutely nothing.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: You're not the ones likely to encounter delays. Raw materials destined for processing must clear the standard customs procedures. This is much more along the lines of a tax program.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: That' s right.

[English]

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    The Chair: Val.

    Ms. Val Meredith: I just have a very short question. I had it on my notes here and forgot to ask.

    I understand that with the Auto Pact, which has been in place for 30-plus years, there aren't any duties collected from the automobile makers, and a part may go back and forth across the border seven or eight times before it's actually in a car. If no duties are collected, and if this movement is so back and forth, why do they have to do all the paperwork? Why do they have to tie everything up by doing masses of paperwork when no duties are collected?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Let them join CSA.

    Ms. Val Meredith: But even with CSA, if there are no duties collected, what is the purpose of their doing all the paperwork?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Until 1986, there were a lot of duties on just about everything, except the Auto Pact.

    Ms. Val Meredith: I'm talking specifically about the Auto Pact.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: But I'm saying here, today, basically all goods coming in from the U.S., except when the origin is elsewhere, are duty free. So whether or not it's automobile parts--and the Auto Pact is no longer really in force--they are free of duty.

    We do collect over $20 billion in GST every year. It's just a cashflow, but you need the paperwork for the GST. We collect that, and eventually they are reimbursed for the GST they have paid. Most of the money paid on auto parts is GST. So there's that.

    The rest of the paperwork, from the CSA point of view, was used for Customs. It was a lot of money; every transaction was recorded in a special inventory system that was a customs inventory system. With CSA, companies can get rid of their inventory system where they can account transactions truck by truck--what they imported and paid the duties on, or GST.

    We are tapping into their corporate books and records, their reconciliation of their amounts with their suppliers, and that sort of thing. They use their normal books and records just to record what they buy out of the country, pay our GST, and at the end of the month they.... It's very similar to the GST: as a business you sell goods; at the end of the month you send us what you owe us in terms of GST. CSA is about the same thing.

    Ms. Val Meredith: But if Revenue Canada or CCRA is already doing that--collecting and recording the GST--why would you have to duplicate it?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: We don't duplicate it. It's just that we do it only for imports. When there are regular imports, there are some delays in which you have to pay the money. We're doing for imports what they have to do with what they manufacture domestically.

    Ms. Val Meredith: I guess my question is whether there is redundancy in some of the paper we have traditionally collected and passed back and forth. Have we looked at the redundancy of a lot of this paper transaction we get, to make the system more efficient?

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: I think that what we have imported into Customs is the tax system of self-assessment. You input your stuff at the end of the month. You pay the government, and we send auditors to make sure your books and records are a true reflection of what you've done. That's basically where we're at. I think every business is very keen on CSA, and they have supported us and asked for it all the way.

    Ms. Val Meredith: That self-assessment can be done away from the congested border areas.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes, all the auditing is done away from the border.

    Ms. Val Meredith: So you take that whole process away from the border crossing to somewhere else.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Yes.

    Ms. Val Meredith: Good.

    Thank you.

    The Chair: Thank you very much, Monsieur Lefebvre. You certainly answered the questions. On behalf of my colleagues, I want to thank you. I think they were all happy with your answers. Thanks for coming, and have a safe trip home.

    Mr. Denis Lefebvre: Merci, monsieur le président.

    The Chair: We're adjourned until Thursday.