Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 15 of 934
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
Thank you.
I'd like to thank you for coming out today and for presenting. I'm very pleased to be able to support Bill C-98, but I do have a couple of a misconceptions, which I've had for a number of years, regarding the similar situation you had with the RCMP.
Under “Powers of Commission in Relation to Complaints”, with regard to the powers in proposed section 44, you were talking about service standards for the RCMP and certain guidelines. You can compel a person to come before you and administer an oath, etc. If a member of the border security were involved in a criminal case, say for an alleged assault or something like that or for excessive force, would you require them to do that before the criminal trial, or would it be set over until after the criminal trial so that they could defend their actions? Would the evidence they gave your organization under oath be able to be used against them in a criminal trial?
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
That's the question I had. There is a kind of abeyance there because there is a conflict.
I have a second part for you, and I'd like you to answer fairly quickly if you could, because I do have another question.
I was there when you guys first started with the RCMP public complaints commission. There was a bit of resentment on the part of members of the RCMP with regard to trust, and I think there was a little resentment the other way; both of us kind of didn't trust each other. But as time went by—not a very long time—a trust was built up from us having worked very closely together. I would think you'd find the same thing moving into this new era. Are you going to set up a bit of an education program for the members of the Canada Border Services Agency so they understand really what you're about? There is going to be that little bit of suspicion on their side, so I wonder if you have a plan for educating them.
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
The gentleman who is on the screen.... I'm sorry; I forget your name, Sergeant.
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
Brian, you talk about service standards within the RCMP and completion of investigations. Do you believe that the service standards should go both ways?
I'm going back to 15 years ago when I was in charge of Fort St. John detachment. I can recall an incident where I had a member stationed there for four years who I never met. He was on a standby investigation. I never knew what it was about. I wasn't told what it was about, but he lived in my area. He never came to work. I wonder if you feel that there should be a service standard both ways.
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
Thank you.
I think I've run out of time.
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
First of all, I couldn't support this amendment.
However, Mr. Talbot, I'd like you to clarify what you said a moment ago.
When you referred to RCMP officers, were you referring to past and present?
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
I still didn't quite get that.
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
Okay. It just wasn't quite clear there. Thank you.
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
Thank you.
I want to thank the presenter, Mr. Amos, for presenting this. As my counterpart said here, I'm very much in favour of trying to connect this country of ours to have cell coverage.
I notice that part (iii) of the text of your motion says:
(iii) continue to work with telecommunication companies, provinces, territories, municipalities, Indigenous communities and relevant emergency response organizations
That's the part of this that kind of interests me. Most provinces have set up an emergency communications program that interconnects the ambulance service, police service and fire service. That has been in place for many years across most of the country that I'm aware of.
Have you talked to or approached the provincial governments, municipal governments or territorial counterparts to see what part they thought we should play? As I see it, it cannot be done by industry alone. It is not going to give us that connectivity on its own.
Your riding is about the same size as mine, Mr. Amos. I think I have about as much uninhabited land and about the same number of municipalities and counties. I have 11 counties and they're all fighting independently to try to get this service, but it's not profitable for industry. I think there is a need for our counties, our provinces, our federal government and industry to communicate.
I'm wondering if you have had any communications within your area as to where they think we should fit in. It's a big dollar amount. The money you mentioned—the $750 million—is just scratching the surface if we're going to give Canada equal coverage from one end to the other. It's going to be in the billions. Industry has told us that realistically it's probably more like $5 billion to $7 billion to connect Canada.
I wonder if you would comment on that.
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
If I'm hearing you correctly, in that innovation fund, I believe we gave Quebec almost $160 million. So did Quebec also invest $161 million in the last four years?
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
Do you know if any of your counties have invested? I believe you have a very similar system to what I have back home, where you have a number of large counties. Are they looking at investing? Have you talked to them about that?
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
Not that lucky this time....
Thank you to all the witnesses, and congratulations, Brian, on your recent promotion.
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
Minister, as you are aware, we did a public safety report on rural crime. My Alberta colleagues and I did quite an extensive round table consultation throughout the province. People are very concerned not only in Alberta but also in Saskatchewan. I understand that you heard from some of their mayors about the shortage of RCMP. Crime increased by about 30% in rural Canada versus in urban.
What really alarms me is that I just looked at the RCMP 2018-19 plan, and it has your manpower progressions over the last five years up to the year 2019-20. Actually, the law enforcement program is calling for a reduction in police officers from 1,366 to 1,319. These are just the manpower numbers. You are increasing the overall strength of the force by 1,033, and you're increasing the administration by 460. Your increase is only about 0.6%, 0.1%, 0.2%, 0.2% over the next few years. The attrition rate has to be 10 times that number.
How are you going to provide policing? How can you tell the people in rural Canada, whether in Saskatchewan, Manitoba, B.C. or Alberta, where that policing is going to come from? Are you going to look at your contract to look at strengthening those numbers? The numbers you have here show that you don't have the manpower.
View Jim Eglinski Profile
CPC (AB)
I have just one quick question, if I may.
Results: 1 - 15 of 934 | Page: 1 of 63

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data