Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
National Security and Defence
Issue 10 - Evidence, February 3, 2005 meeting
ST. JOHN'S, Thursday, February 3, 2005
The Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence met this day at 8 a.m. to examine and report on the national security policy for Canada.
Senator Colin Kenny (Chairman) in the chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the meeting of the Senate Standing Committee on National Security and Defence. We are very pleased to be in St. John's again today. It is a city with a proud military tradition. St. John's is the home to Canadian Forces Station St. John's, 1 Battalion Royal Newfoundland Regiment, 56 Field Engineer Squadron, 36 Service Battalion, and 728 Communication Squadron. Thousands of young men and women from this region served in two world wars in Korea, and have continued to serve in peacekeeping and peacemaking missions ever since.
I would briefly introduce the members of the committee to you. On my immediate right is the distinguished Senator from Nova Scotia, Senator Michael Forrestall. He has served the constituents of Dartmouth for the last 37 years, first as their member of the House of Commons, then as their senator. While in the House of Commons, he served as the official opposition defence critic from 1966-76. He is also a member of our Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs.
Beside him is Senator Michael Meighen. Senator Meighen is a lawyer, and is Chancellor of the University of King's College, and past Chair of the Stratford Festival. He has honorary doctorates in Civil Law from Mount Allison University and the University of New Brunswick. He is currently Chair of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs, and he is also a member of the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce.
Beside him is Senator Tommy Banks from Alberta. He is the Chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources, which recently released a report entitled the "One-Tonne Challenge.'' He is well known to Canadians as a versatile musician and entertainer. He provided musical direction for the ceremonies of the 1988 Olympic Winter Games. He is an officer of the Order of Canada, and he has received a Juno Award.
On my left, your right, is Senator Jane Cordy from Nova Scotia. She is an accomplished educator with an extensive record in community involvement, including serving as Vice-Chair of the Halifax-Dartmouth Port Development Commission. She is Chair of the Canadian NATO Parliamentary Association, and she is a member of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology.
At the end of the table is Senator Norman Atkins from Ontario. He came to the Senate with 27 years of experience in the field of communications. He has served as senior advisor to Mr. Robert Stanfield, Premier William Davis of Ontario, and Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. He also is a member of our Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs.
I will not go through the history of the committee's work. I will proceed directly to introducing the members of the panel.
We have before us Mr. Trevor Taylor, Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture of Newfoundland and Labrador since November of 2003. He has been extensively involved in the fishery at various levels over the years, and has served in the House of Assembly since January 2001. Mr. Taylor, I understand, has political responsibilities for Labrador.
Mr. John Hickey was elected as the member of the Newfoundland and Labrador House of Assembly for the Lake Melville District in October 2003. Previous to that, he has served in various capacities with the Town Council of HappyValley-Goose Bay, most recently as its mayor. We have Mr. Leo Abbas who is currently the mayor of HappyValley-Goose Bay.
Gentlemen, we are very pleased to have the opportunity to have you before us. We understand that there is a very serious issue facing the community. We look forward to hearing what you have to tell us. Minister, the floor is yours.
The Honourable Trevor Taylor, Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture and Minister Responsible for Labrador, Government of Newfoundland and Labrador: Thank you, senators and good morning. Welcome to Newfoundland and Labrador and welcome to St. John's. This morning I will go over briefly a lengthy presentation, but in the interest of time I will not read all of it. If you have not been provided with a copy, we will provide one shortly.
The Chairman: I would be happy to take any written material that you have, and we will go through it in some detail.
Mr. Taylor: I think we have a number of copies here, and we will provide it at your convenience.
The presentation today will focus on three areas: an overview of military presence in Newfoundland and Labrador; the three military establishments in the province, and associated issues; and recommendations for your consideration. You will note that I will pay particular attention to the future viability of the foreign military training program at 5 Wing Goose Bay. Feel free to tell me if I am talking too fast.
The Chairman: You are doing fine so far.
Mr. Taylor: Okay, I have that problem.
As I said, I am not going through all this, but a brief history about the strategic location of Newfoundland and Labrador: Since September 11, 2001 the world's focus has been on threats of global terrorism and new and emerging warfare techniques, as well as the changing security environment. Many governments around the world have undertaken to assess their capabilities, both at home and abroad, to respond appropriately to this new era of security and defence requirements. Given our strategic location globally, it is no surprise that so many international flights were diverted to the province's airports onSeptember 11, 2001.
We have had a long history of military presence, as the senator alluded to in his opening remarks, going back to the 16th century certainly. We have hosted the United States Air Force for several decades during the 1900s at four prominent locations: Goose Bay, Fort Pepperrell in St. John's, Stephenville, and Argentia. Most recently, for the past couple of decades, 5 Wing Goose Bay has had an extensive foreign military presence, including the British, Dutch, Italian, and German air forces who have maintained permanent detachments in support of foreign military training programs.
The Canadian military has also recognized the strategic location of this province as demonstrated through its commitment to NORAD at Goose Bay, the DEW Line/Pine Tree Line radar sites located here, as well as the fact that the Department of National Defence established 5th Wing Goose Bay as a Canadian Forces Base when the United States Air Force no longer required Goose Bay as a location.
Very briefly, to put it into context, Newfoundland and Labrador's participation in the Canadian military, as the senator alluded to in his opening remarks: Newfoundlanders and Labradorians comprise approximately 8 per cent of the Canadian Forces Regular Force. This is astounding given that the province has only 1.6 per cent of the Canadian population. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians also comprise approximately 9.1 per cent of the national cadet population, approximately 20 per cent of the navy, and approximately 3.1 per cent of reservists. We think it is important to reiterate that here this morning. You probably know it anyway, but when you stack it up against the actual deployment of Canadian Forces personnel and the expenditure by the Department of National Defence in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, certainly there is a stark discrepancy between the amount we actually contribute to the Canadian armed forces, and the presence of Canadian armed forces personnel and the expenditures here in this province.
In fiscal year 2003-04, the Department of National Defence records indicate that there were 600 regular force, 122 civilian, and 1,022 reservist personnel stationed here with a net expenditure of $128 million. This equates to a $250 per capita expenditure. Only two other provinces in Canada, Saskatchewan and Prince Edward Island, are lower. The military presence in Newfoundland and Labrador has been dwindling for some time, with serious attrition beginning with the negative impact of the 1996 program review conducted by the Government of Canada. For example, in 1996- 97 there were 267 regular force personnel stationed at 5 Wing, whereas in 2003-04 there were 94.
Similarly, in the case of 9 Wing Gander, regular force personnel declined from approximately 187 to 134, while the number of civilian personnel employed at the base has dropped dramatically from 97 to 29 over the same period.
Throughout the presentation, and throughout our discussion here today, we would like to focus on four categories of corporate priorities for defence that the Department of National Defence has established: adapt to the evolving security environment and enhance strategic relationships; transform and modernize the Canadian Forces; develop and support a professional, effective and sustainable defence team; and maximize effectiveness in the management of resources.
I will refer to the following three specific objectives outlined by the Department of National Defence under its priorities during the remainder of this presentation: the promotion of key international defence and security relationships; a focus on strategic planning efforts on the required capabilities; and enhancement of the capability to operate effectively in joint, inter-agency, and multi-national environments. We think there is an opportunity to accomplish much of this in this province.
I will touch briefly on Canadian Forces Station St. John's and 9 Wing/CFB Gander. From my own personal experience — and it is a very limited experience, I will be the first to admit — one of the most impressive advancements for Canadian Forces Station St. John's is the growth of the Naval Engineering School detachment at the Marine Institute. Since 2000, the detachment has more than doubled its size to approximately 200 officers training at the institute. Graduate naval officers from this program are among the most highly trained in the world. Partnerships with local educational facilities can undoubtedly prove beneficial and highly successful. The Marine Institute estimates that the economic impact of this particular program is in excess of $14 million annually. This specific example certainly speaks to the Department of National Defence's priority of developing and supporting a professional, effective and sustainable defence team. Again, a personal observation, in advance of the recommendation: it is really quite surprising that the biggest Canadian military presence in this province is at the Marine Institute with 200 personnel. Given, as I said, our contribution by our men and women to the ranks of the Canadian armed forces, it speaks volumes that the Canadian Forces' largest contingent in the province is actually up on the hill here going to school, and that we really do not have, outside of 9 Wing, much in the way of an operational contingent of the Canadian Forces in this province.
Our recommendation, flowing from that, is that the Department of National Defence continue to pursue, develop, and enhance partnerships with educational facilities in Newfoundland and Labrador in accordance with the Department of National Defence priority of developing and supporting a professional, effective and sustainable defence team. Successful models, such as the Naval Engineering School detachment at the Marine Institute, should be reviewed for their best practices.
Just for the record, and I will not go into this very far, as it relates to Canadian Forces Base Gander, and 9 Wing in particular, there have been rumblings over the past number of years about a possible move of 103 Search and Rescue Squadron from Gander. It is the position and view of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador that it should not happen. We believe that Gander has served 103 Search and Rescue Squadron well, and 103 Search and Rescue Squadron has been able to carry out its duties quite well from CFB Gander. We think that the presence of 103 SAR Squadron in Gander should be preserved for the long term.
At the risk of being shot by somebody from St. John's, because that is where it has been rumoured to go from time to time, there is a substantial presence of privately operated helicopters in St. John's right now, obviously, in support of the offshore oil industry. From that perspective alone, having helicopters that are capable of responding to emergencies in the offshore area and the fishing industry stationed in two locations would be, I think, advantageous to all of us. Operationally, it would make much more sense. For those reasons, we think that 103 squadron should remain in Gander. In the event that Gander cannot respond, St. John's would have some ability to respond from the private sector whereas if both were stationed in St. John's, both 103 squadron along with the private capabilities would maybe erode our ability to respond in the case of an emergency. I will just leave my comments on 9 Wing there.
The most pressing concern for the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, and certainly from MHA Hickey's and Mayor Abbas' constituents, is the future of 5 Wing Goose Bay.
The Foreign Military Training program at Goose Bay, which has operated under a 10-year Memorandum of Understanding (1996-06), is one of the largest economic generators in the Labrador region. In 2002-03, the Foreign Military Training program generated approximately 1,655 person-years of employment, contributed $85.95 million to the provincial GDP and generated $36.55 million in provincial government revenues.
This agreement is scheduled to expire in early 2006. There are currently no training partners scheduled to train at 5 Wing beyond 2005. This is a significant issue that is of grave concern to the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and to the community of Happy Valley-Goose Bay. It has also captured the attention of Premier Danny Williams, Prime Minister Paul Martin, and the Minister of National Defence, the Honourable Bill Graham. The Prime Minister and Premier have indicated publicly their commitment to the future viability of Foreign Military Training at 5 Wing. The community has also established a concerned citizens' organization, the Goose Bay Citizens' Coalition, which has met with both First Ministers.
Prior to 2004, the Department of National Defence allocated approximately $35 million to $40 million annually to the operation and maintenance of 5 Wing, including the Canadian Forces component. The Government of Canada, however, recoups significant corporate and personal income tax and other economic benefits as a result, directly and indirectly, from the economic spinoffs of this program which return to the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Canada, not DND's budget. For example, the Department of National Defence Estimated Expenditures by Electoral District and Province indicate that as much as $65 million was recouped as revenue from this program as recently as fiscal year 2000-01.
Although 5 Wing serves as a NORAD CF-18 forward deployment base, military officials have indicated that CFB Goose Bay is not an operational requirement for the Canadian Forces. From a strictly military perspective, the $35 million to $40 million annual allocation in DND's budget for Goose Bay is, therefore, an expenditure which does not advance from Canadian Forces operational needs. We believe that is the crux of the problem, quite frankly. The Canadian Forces hierarchy, we believe, view CFB Goose Bay as a drain on their revenues. It is not an operational requirement, therefore they have no real attachment to the base. It is there to support Foreign Military Training. I would imagine, without taking the liberty of speaking on their behalf and putting words in their mouth, that causes problems. We can understand why DND would think that way. Looking at it from the perspective of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, and we believe the Government of Canada should look at it from this perspective also, this $35 million to $40 million investment, expenditure, whatever way you want to look at it, by the Department of National Defence generates significant foreign dollars and foreign dollar expenditures in the province, in the country, and locally in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. It does a great deal, and has done a great deal, towards supporting Canada's foreign military commitments as part of NATO. We think that it should be pursued from that perspective.
I will run over our recommendations quickly in the interest of time, as I know that MHA Hickey and Mayor Abbas will want to have a few comments.
Our recommendations, senators, is that 5 Wing Goose Bay be used further in achieving Canadian forces and NATO objectives of interoperability and integration through the following.
First, the Department of National Defence should be provided with adequate financial resources to ensure the future viability of a foreign military flight training program over a period of time, for example three years, to allow the Department of National Defence to "grow the business'' at CFB Goose Bay.
Second, the Department of National Defence should implement additional training activities at 5 Wing to meet the evolving training needs of the Canadian Forces and international forces. We recognize that in the post-Cold-War era, the need for low-level flight training has diminished substantially. We recognize that there is a need for a changing and evolving training package at 5 Wing. We believe that the Department of National Defence needs to move down the road towards providing those training opportunities and requirements for our foreign military partners so that when they come to Goose Bay they can have, as our colleague here says, the complete sandbox to play in. They can have all the toys in the sandbox, as they say.
The Department of National Defence should also conduct a dedicated marketing effort for 5 Wing Goose Bay. Currently, Foreign Military Training and the marketing associated with that is done generically, from the Canadian forces perspective, and we believe there should be dedicated resources and personnel to 5 Wing Goose Bay. If the future of 5 Wing Goose Bay is tied to Foreign Military Training, then the resources to make that a possibility or reality need to be dedicated to it.
Finally, where appropriate, the Canadian Forces should conduct training activities in conjunction with the training partners present at 5 Wing. One comment made by foreign military personnel is that one of the things they find striking is that the Canadian Forces do not use Goose Bay, while they are trying to market it as a foreign military destination. While there is no commitment beyond 2005, by foreign military air forces to train at 5 Wing, it is not because of the venue. As we understand it, there is a great deal of satisfaction with 5 Wing Goose Bay by European air forces. With European air forces they find it is a great venue. It is a phenomenal facility. There is a great deal of air space available, and tremendous training opportunities. However, the associated resources and the dedication of resources by the Government of Canada through the Department of National Defence, in our view, is not being provided in order to secure the future of 5 Wing, and to secure the future of Foreign Military Training there.
I am going to stop right there and turn it over, if it is okay with you senator, to Mayor Hickey.
The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Taylor. Mr. Hickey, you have the floor.
Mr. John Hickey, MHA, Lake Melville, House of Assembly of Newfoundland and Labrador: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.
Mr. Chairman, Senators, first of all let me bring greetings, as we say in Labrador, from the Big Land. I am very happy to have this opportunity this morning to talk about probably the one of the most pressing issues that we face in the community of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, which is 5 Wing Goose Bay. It is the economic engine of my riding, which is the great district of Lake Melville. It is a file that I have been involved with since 1985 when I first cut my teeth as a young municipal politician and became involved with the town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay. As you alluded to earlier, before I took this job, I was the mayor.
Mr. Chairman, senators, over the years we have seen many changes to the base at Goose Bay. Before we get into that, and my good friend Mayor Abbas will certainly talk about some of this in great detail because he too knows the file very well, I want to talk in general for a few minutes about Labrador. Labrador is 295,000 square kilometres. Just to give you a sense of the size of that piece of property in this country, we can fit the provinces of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and the island portion of Newfoundland inside the land mass of Labrador. It is a very big piece of property.
Inside that property we have a billion-dollar asset at 5 Wing Goose Bay. It has a runway of 11,500 feet and an alternate runway of 9,500 feet. It was certainly the main staging area during the Second World War, used by the Americans to resupply troops and refuel airplanes in the war effort.
When I first started on this file in 1985, we used to have 1,200 civilians working at the base. Today, we are fighting for our lives to keep 350 employed.
As we went through the history of the base, we saw the Americans leave. Why did they leave? It was very simple. Our government, the Canadian government drove them out because they drove the cost of the base up. Even though the Americans gave us the facility, we basically drove them out because of the cost. That was very sad for the community of HappyValley-Goose Bay when the United States Air Force left.
Then the Canadian government did not know what to do with the base so they turned it over to Public Works Canada.In 1985, there was an idea to make Goose Bay a NATO training centre. At that time there were talks of offering the infrastructure at Goose Bay to NATO as part of a commitment by Canada to work with our allies and to provide space for training.
The beauty about Labrador and the beauty about 5 Wing Goose Bay is we have what we call the freedom to fly; 137,000 square kilometres of air space. The country of Britain can be set inside the airspace that these allied forces use to do low-level, medium-level and high-level flying. It is very strategically located. I want to make this point because this is something that raises our passion, no question. When we saw the devastation of September 11, Goose Bay was identified as the first line of defence. F-18 fighter jets were flown to Goose Bay and put on the tarmac, hot and ready to go. It was the first line of defence to look after the northeast quadrant of North America. Again, our location was strategic. Today, even though we have commitments from the Prime Minister and the Minister of National Defence, we do not see those commitments coming through on the ground at Goose Bay.
Over the years as I have dealt with this file, I have had so many meetings. I remember as the mayor of the community, and Mayor Abbas will talk about this, I am sure, in his address to you, how I, as the mayor, had to host many generals from Germany, Holland, Britain and Italy. As we promoted our community to them and opened our community with open arms, the question came back: We are flying here, but why is it that your country, your Department of National Defence, and your fighter aircraft are not training here with us? When you are trying to sell your community to those particular people, it is hard to answer that question, because there is really no rationale. We want to play a role in NATO and NORAD, but when we want to play a role in overseas conflicts and be on the world stage with the rest of the world as we take on some of our peacemaking and peacekeeping operations, we are going to have to do that with our allies. Interoperational capability between air forces and militaries is something that is very important. We see this as a prime opportunity to train with our allies for those interoperational capabilities. That is what makes Labrador and 5 Wing Goose Bay unique.
I want to say also that, as we move down the road, we see many opportunities. There is opportunity for great success here, both for our country, Canada, and for our province to participate, in particular for Labrador and 5 Wing Goose Bay to provide many opportunities in training.
This winter I just finished a flight with the British where I spent a day doing low-level flying in a Hercules aircraft, dropping supplies to special forces that were training in Labrador this winter. As we speak, we have 20 highly trained special forces from Germany that are in Labrador doing training on the ground as we speak. The interest is there. I think in the 20 years Germany was in Goose Bay, we saw 80,000 troops pass through the base to do training. We saw a significant amount of allied expenditure, new money coming into the Government of Canada, somewhere in the vicinity of $100 million. Goose Bay, senators, was a moneymaker, not a moneytaker.
I want to impress upon you this morning that we see, certainly, the reports out of your committee and other discussions that we are going to have with the federal government in the future as an opportunity to review the role of 5 Wing Goose Bay, of the town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay. The Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, under the leadership of Premier Danny Williams, is committed to supporting missile defence, and the role that Canada will play in that. We believe that in Goose Bay, certainly, there is another opportunity for us to play a key role as we move down the road to further secure our country and, indeed, to play a role in securing what we call the northeast quadrant of North America.
I will not go on much more. I think you can get the drift from my comments as to how we feel about this very important issue. I am certainly interested in engaging some questions and answers as we move on this discussion this morning. I would like to introduce and turn over to my good friend and colleague, Mayor Leo Abbas from the town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay.
The Chairman: Thank you Mr. Hickey. Mr. Abbas you have the floor.
Mr. Leo Abbas, Mayor, Town of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Labrador: Thank you. Mr. Chairman and senators, I am glad to be here this morning. It is a file that we have been working on for the past week and a half because we were not made aware that these meetings were taking place here in our province.
I want to thank Mr. Taylor and MHA Hickey for providing me with the opportunity to sit here with the province this morning and express some views from the community of HappyValley-Goose Bay.
I will express another disappointment that you are not getting the opportunity to come and see the facilities at 5 Wing Goose Bay. I encourage you to try to get to 5 Wing to see what is there, because no matter what we say here at this table, unless you can visualize it, you cannot imagine what is there.
I want to key in on a few points here; potential commitment and marketing. From a community's perspective we see all kinds of potential for military training in Happy Valley-Goose Bayat 5 Wing Goose Bay, not only for our foreign allied friends, but also for our Canadian defence, the DND department as well.
This summer I had the opportunity to participate in alessons-learned tour with 14 other members of our community. We travelled to five different areas in the country: Portage la Prairie, Manitoba; Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan; Summerside, Prince Edward Island; Chatham, New Brunswick; and Cornwallis, Nova Scotia. For me, it was an eye-opener. When we flew from Moose Jaw to Portage la Prairie, we were told to have a look out the right side of plane and we would see the base at Portage la Prairie. I could not believe what I was seeing. To put it in perspective for you, and the only way I could describe it to the community members at home, if you can imagine a business envelop, Portage la Prairie would be the postage stamp and 5 Wing Goose Bay would be the remainder of that envelope.
We have a huge facility there. The infrastructure at 5 Wing Goose Bay is not like other Canadian bases. We were told in Chatham to get rid of our infrastructure; we are not talking that type of infrastructure. The infrastructure at 5 Wing Goose Bay was put there by the Americans. The infrastructure is stilltop-quality facilities. We have hangars, and as MHA Hickey alluded to, we have a runway that can handle anything that flies in the air. We have a training space, a Practice Target Area, PTA. Other sectors in our country do not even know it is there. We have F-18s training out of Bagotville. They have no PTA. We were fortunate this summer, through the province and through DND, to get an F- 18 into Goose Bay to do some supersonic testing. Again, from a community's perspective, when the pilot is there doing the testing for us and he is not aware that we have a target range at 5 Wing and he has none in Bagotville, then we sit back and say, "Well what are they doing in Bagotville — no target range and no threat emitters. We were fortunate to get a threat emitter this year. We do not want to compete with any other base in Canada. We want to be able to complement and work with DND.
The province has been very pro-active under this government in pushing the file of 5 Wing Goose Bay, and we appreciate that.
Commitment of the people in Central Labrador, and indeed all of Labrador, is second to none. We have grown up as a community under the military presence. The military have been there since 1941. Our community has accepted them with open arms. We have worked with them. Just to give you an example, right now we have a service provider circle at 5 Wing Goose Bay. The unions that work with that service provider have agreed that during the life of this contract, and there is 10 years left on that contract, that there will be stability within the workforce. There will be no labour disruptions. I think that says a lot for the commitment of the workforce at 5 Wing. They are sending a message to the foreign allies that, look, you have a workforce here that is competent and capable and we are prepared to work with whatever comes our way.
I believe that Happy Valley-Goose Bay, 5 Wing Goose Bay, has been a wonderful ambassador for Canada. The foreign allies who have served at 5 Wing have nothing but fond memories and kind words to say about the area. The training, we hear only compliments about the ability to do certain things in Goose Bay with regards to flying. The negative knock comes from the attitude of the Department of National Defence. As MHA Hickey alluded to, it was through pricing and a lack of growing the business, and that is a phrase that we have heard in Central Labrador for the past 10 years. We have been told that changes were made on the base to grow the business; we have not seen any growth. We have seen the demolition of infrastructure. We have seen the downsizing, and basically, I believe, we have seen the forcing out of our allies through the pricing regime that has been in place.
The facility, 5 Wing Goose Bay, requires a commitment from the Canadian government. I will quote the Prime Minister. It was on the January 19 of last year. A delegation of community leaders travelled to Ottawa and we were told by the Prime Minister, and the Minister of Defence of the day, David Pratt, that the Government of Canada would explore all options to make Goose Bay viable, to make 5 Wing viable. At that point we questioned the Prime Minister on his exact words: "Did you say to explore to see if 5 Wing was viable, or to make it viable?'' He clearly stated, "We will explore all options to make it viable.'' Now, those were orders that we believe came from on high, the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defence. When we got back to our home community, just words, words from the Prime Minister, but what we saw on the ground with regards to the attitude of the Department of National Defence was to continue to downsize, to remove, and to take away any hope that our community has in seeing the business grow.
We used to have an office in Ottawa. Maybe you are familiar with the Goose Bay Office, GBO. It is disbanded now. I have been on council for eight years now, and that used to be the popular question when anybody was talking with regards to the base, "What is GBO doing?'' We were always told that GBO was marketing 5 Wing Goose Bay. No marketing: there is a brochure that has been produced in the past month and a half that now markets 5 Wing Goose Bay. There has been a committee put in place in the past two months that is now set up to market Goose Bay. We have a volunteer organization in Goose Bay right now called the Goose Bay Citizens' Coalition: the town, all the stakeholders and the Chamber of Commerce are members. In the past year and a half, we have spent more time and more hours in meetings such as this. We have met with the Prime Minister. We have met with the Premier. We have met with Minister David Pratt, the former Defence Minister. We have met with Associate Minister Mauril Bélanger. We have met with Minister Bill Graham just a week ago. We met with Minister John Efford on three or four occasions. We met with our late MP, Lawrence O'Brien. We have tweaked our presentation, we have sung our song, and we have heard comments that we believe give us some faith to look into the future.
The Minister of Defence referred to a couple of my comments a week ago as being a little bit cynical. There is no cynicism in my comments. My comments are sincere. I believe I speak on behalf of the people of Happy Valley-Goose Bay. We believe that 5 Wing presents itself to our government as an opportunity.If you want to enhance national security, national defence and homeland security, 5 Wing presents an area where you can work from. You have a workforce, you have a community that is committed to military training. MHA Hickey referred to, after September 11, the F-18s that were from Bagotville. I think they were actually leaving Goose Bay to go back to Bagotville, but they were ordered to go back. They were on the ground prior to September 11, then ordered back to Goose Bay, and then ordered to remain there on alert. Again, if you do not know Goose Bay, we have a base within a base. We have a base that was set up by the Canadian government and never used. It sits there today, idle.
When you look at enhancing national defence and growing the business of national defence, you can work out of Goose Bay. Maybe you have to do a little painting, but you have facilities right now that will allow you to improve our national defence and our homeland security. You also have a community on record as saying that they are prepared to play a role in missile defence. As we speak, there are people talking to our town and the service provider in 5 Wing circle about the possibility of setting up an installation there.
I do not know what the people of Central Labrador have to say or do. We are not looking for handouts. We believe we have a product that can be utilized with our government, but the government has to take a change of attitude. They have to be prepared to make a commitment. I believe they have to look at making an operational requirement for 5 Wing Goose Bay. It could come in a variety of ways. It could be a fixed-wingsearch-and-rescue squadron stationed there. We had the unmanned aerial vehicles, UAV, tested there this summer. All the tests went well.
There is a gentleman who sits on the committee with us and he talks about conspiracy theory. There was a meeting last night in Happy Valley-Goose Bay — obviously, I was on my way here — and we have been told that the future of 5 Wing is right now in the hands of the Canadian government, and the department that will be heading that will be the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, ACOA. ACOA will be working with DND and theoffice of John Everett, Minister of Natural Resources Canada, to see what can be done with 5 Wing Goose Bay, to explore and research the possibilities there. I had a call last nightabout 12:30 that emotions ran high in this meeting last night. People are frightened, people are sceptical, and they are looking for an answer. They are looking for a commitment from the Canadian government.
My colleagues here just said leave time for questions. I will leave it at that. I do have a presentation that I will pass on to you to take back with you. On behalf of the community of Central Labrador, I encourage you to come to our area to have a look at the facilities there.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr. Abbas. I did not notice in any of your presentations, but I think it is appropriate to note, that Senator William Rompkey, the Deputy Leader of the government in the Senate, has been very active on this file, and he was instrumental in arranging this meeting today. In fact, he called me personally to adjust the program so that we could be sure to hear you, and we were very happy to do so. I think that it should be on the record that he is actively pursuing this file in Ottawa, and has been in touch with this committee on a number of occasions.
Mr. Abbas: I apologize. That was an oversight on my part.
The Chairman: No, fair ball, but Senator Rompkey knows the terms.
Mr. Abbas: No, I know.
The Chairman: Senator Rompkey is really working hard on this.
Senator Forrestall: Thank you Mr. Chairman, and welcome Minister and distinguished guests, as you all are. You have expressed a wish that we go there. I have been to Happy Valley on three or four occasions, the last occasion being a review of the Royal Canadian Air Force. Do you remember, John? Other occasions were focussed very deeply on the longevity and the future of 5 Wing in that magnificent landscape. We had environmental problems, you will remember, at the time. I am fond of often telling the little story that instead of losing the caribou herd we encourage them to multiply with low-level flying.
We have been there. We are all interested. The chair, I am sure, has been there. I do not know if any members of this committee have not had an occasion to be in Goose Bay for one reason or another. I echo the chair's words about the work of Bill Rompkey who would never let any of us forget about Goose Bay, and to express my regrets of the loss of your member of Parliament, because no one was more key in keeping alive your hopes and providing a good strong voice in Ottawa.
Could I ask just two or three questions? First of all, perhaps once more, just to assure you that you have no enemies here, it is a magnificent piece of real estate. We are generally pro-military, pro-defence and pro-active on these files and questions. The value of Goose Bay to the national and international scheme is immeasurably high. We would be morally wrong to take it out of the design for world cooperation, and defence strategy otherwise, and others.
When we were here last, I asked the basic question: How much would it cost to shut Goose Bay down, as opposed to maintaining it? Could one of you answer that?
Mr. Abbas: I think the figure that I have heard thrown around is in excess of $500 million.
Senator Forrestall: To shut it down?
Mr. Abbas: To shut it down. You have an environmental legacy that you have to take care of.
Senator Forrestall: What is the cost of maintaining the runway?
Mr. Abbas: I was told by the former CEO that if nobody flew into Goose Bay next year, they would still have to spend about $75 million. I am not sure how he figured that out but I would say somewhere between $40 million and $65 million.
Senator Forrestall: There is no rush to go jumping off a cliff; we are not a lemming society. It is cheaper to maintain it the way it is, if an immediate answer cannot be found.
Mr. Hickey: Just a couple of points on that, Senator Forrestall.
When we talk about shutting it down, and the mayor alluded to the fact that we have an environmental issue there that was left from the United States Air Force, the Government of Canada certainly received, I think, somewhere around the vicinity of $100 million to clean that mess up. We have taken responsibility as the Government of Canada on that, and there is environmental remediation that is taking place right now as we speak. Let me say this: Shutting it down, in our view, is not an answer because there is absolutely no need to go there. When we look at the strategic location, if you look at the numbers of heavy aircraft that land in Goose Bay each year because of heart attacks, medical issues, engine failures and you name it, why do they look at Goose Bay? They look at Goose Bay because we have 11,500 feet that they can put that aircraft down, and we have the very best crash, fire, and rescue operation anywhere in the East Coast of North America. The best trained: they are trained to go in. Very few fire stations anywhere have the ability, with the training of their personnel, to go into a burning aircraft to save lives. We have the full capabilities at 5 Wing Goose Bay.
The other thing is just from a civilian aspect. Here we are talking about the north, and sovereignty in the north, and that Canada wants to make sure that we have our presence in the north. Well there is no better place to launch operations into the north. I think we saw that very clearly last summer with the UAVs when they stayed up for some 53 hours. Here is another opportunity for 5 Wing Goose Bay. I hope that the Department of National Defence looks seriously at this particular piece of technology, because not only is it there for military operations and opportunities, but for civilian opportunities, particularly in monitoring offshore overfishing by foreigners which, as you all know, is still happening on the nose and tail of the Grand Banks. It provides the opportunity to monitor the dumping of bilges into our coastal waters, and, certainly on the island portion of the province, we have had many catastrophes of sea birds and that, so all this can be done from 5 Wing Goose Bay.
Shutting it down, in my view, would be absolutely the most stupid thing, to put it bluntly, that our government could ever conceive, with all the potential opportunities.
I want to talk about the Italians for a minute because it is an interesting story. If you remember the Italians when they first came to Canada and 5 Wing Goose Bay, they were not allowed to do that particular flying in their own country because of the accident of the gondola with the United States Air Force aircraft. They came to a community that opened up to them with banners flying. They just could not believe that anywhere there would be a community to give them the welcome that they received here.
I am sorry I have been a little long-winded, but I do sometimes go on about that. I hope I have answered your question, senator.
Senator Forrestall: You have been emotional about it, and as Mr. Abbas has suggested, emotions do run somewhat high.
I will ask just one question and I will pass it along. There is some possibility of the location of equipment to enhance monitoring of space with respect to errant missiles heading in our general direction. Have you had any discussion with the government about the vicinity as a locator? What was the result of those discussions; positive or negative?
Mr. Abbas: We have not had any actual discussions with the government. The town is on record as supporting it. The MH.A, the late Lawrence O'Brien, was on record. The Premier of the province is on record as supporting missile defence. We had U.S. Ambassador Paul Cellucci in Happy Valley-Goose Bay this September, and we talked about it with him as well. He sees possibilities there. Again, the question he asked: Where is DND? Where are the Canadian Forces here?
Formal talks, no, but there has been a company in our area who has been exploring the possibilities of setting up a system. From my perspective, we have not been at large to speak freely about it just yet. The point is, and I believe there has to be an education of the people here, we are looking at putting up a radar installation that may pick up incoming weapons. Well, in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and in a number of areas in Labrador since the 1940s, there have been radar screens, no different basically than what we have had in the past. We are not talking about putting nuclear warheads or missiles on our land.
Senator Forrestall: These radars are something else again. I wondered if you had discussions, and it is certainly worth pursuing. While we, sir, do not have a chequebook, we have the capacity to speak with our colleagues and friends in Ottawa, and that, I can assure you, most of us will do.
Mr. Abbas: I think it is safe to say from our community's perspective that if there is a role we can play with regards to national security of the country, and indeed the continent of North America, we are prepared to play a role there. If it is housing and installation —
Senator Forrestall: Thank you gentlemen and good luck.
The Chairman: Senator Rompkey actually has put on very extensive presentations regarding that radar, and well over 20 Members of Parliament have been present.
Senator Banks: Thank you, Chair. I did not know we had time left. We have a minute?
The Chairman: We are past our time, but this is an important subject, and I think we should extend it so we have our questions asked.
Senator Banks: I have a long list of questions, but I will ask only one.
Your Worship, do you take some comfort from the news, as you have told us this morning, that ACOA, which perhaps is going to have a business mindset, more than DND per se, now seems to be taking a hand in this? Does that give you some comfort? You have a good product but at the moment it seems difficult to find a market for it. Do you think that news is helpful?
Mr. Abbas: I take some comfort in it. Again, I was not at the meeting last night, but I did have a presentation. I also sit on a steering committee that is working with ACOA locally. I take some comfort in it. To be honest with you, I believe we are getting what we asked for and what the Prime Minister promised us; to explore all options to make it viable. The cynicism comes from the community at large. We have heard words in the past. Some will believe that this is a way to allow DND to leave. Put ACOA at the helm, and it is a way for DND to slip out. There has to be an education of the people in our community. At the moment there is still a little confusion there, like we are going down two different roads. The federal government is going down this road, and the community is being asked to go down another road. I do not know how we can explore options for the diversification of the infrastructure on 5 Wing without knowing exactly what the government is doing. We may go down a road where we see some potential in the future, only to be told, no, that cannot happen, that cannot materialize because we do not know that government route yet, but I am optimistic about it. I believe there is potential there.
Mr. Taylor: Senator, if I can just make a brief comment on that as well: The town and the province are open to other development opportunities around 5 Wing Goose Bay, around the base in Goose Bay. We know that there is a tremendous amount of infrastructure that can be used for other things, other than foreign flight training. However, it is like a shopping mall. In our view, any shopping mall needs to have its anchor tenant, and we believe that Foreign Military Training is the anchor tenant for 5 Wing Goose Bay and for Happy Valley-Goose Bay. There are selfish reasons for saying that, but if you look at it from a national picture, if you look at it for North American air defence, if you look at the North American defence, where else makes sense? Goose Bay is on the leading edge of the North American Northeast. Where better to be stationed?
Senator Banks: That begs a question, Minister, and I guess I will ask it of you. Do you subscribe to the idea, which we have heard this morning, that the only reason that the Italians, British, Americans, Dutch and Germans are not there anymore is because it costs too much? Is that the only reason they are not there?
Mr. Taylor: I do not know if it is the only reason, but it is, obviously, a major factor that has determined their deployment. They are still coming to North America for training. They are going to Cold Lake. They are going to the U.S. to some extent. They have their budgets to live within, just as our military has a budget to live within. Obviously, with some shrinking of military expenditures in European countries, just as we see in our own country, there is added pressure on the military there to try and get the best deal they can. The cost structure in 5 Wing had a detrimental effect but, obviously, the operational requirements of air forces are factors also. There is work ongoing to deal with some of the inadequacies as they relate to the training package. From the perspective of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, we have released from further environmental assessment the chaffs and flares, and those types of things, so that an enhanced training package can be provided, but the cost is a big factor.
Senator Meighen: I know we are running out of time, but thank you. This is the question I wanted to ask that Senator Banks, I will not say, stole, but appropriated quite properly from me.
Let us pursue that for a second. Have you run this particular issue to ground with the Department of National Defence, and with the government? Are they prepared to reduce the fees?
Mr. Hickey: I would like to address that. I must say, we have seen encouragement over the last number of months with a new pricing structure. When I talked about it to the British commander, he said, "John, it is too bad we did not have this five years ago. Goose Bay would still be our number one operational training for the British air force.'' What has happened here, very simply, senators, is that the Department of National Defence has looked for an exit strategy on 5 Wing Goose Bay for many years. You are absolutely right when you said earlier, we had a couple of political champions in Lawrence O'Brien, Senator Rompkey, the Premier of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador when he made it one of the top three priorities in our Blue Book issued last year, and others. It brought the profile of this base up. I want to say this very clearly, this morning: Goose Bay is the best training facility, bar none, anywhere in the world. I have talked to Canadian pilots. I have talked to American pilots who have been up and looked at it. I have talked to all the air force pilots. It is a great place. When we talk about our European allies, we have to remember: you cannot do this in Germany; you cannot do it in Italy; and you cannot do it in Britain. They do not have the space. Where can you find a piece of property with 137,000 square kilometres to fly in, and not fly over one single person in the run of a day?
Mr. Abbas: Just to add to the answer there, price is one factor, but DND did not stay with the times with regards to 5 Wing Goose Bay on training tactics with the allies, so that became another factor. We have been asking for things like threat emitters and different, as we call them, toys in the sandbox for the allies to use. Price was one thing. We have a new pricing system in place now. Minister Taylor alluded to the use of flare and chaff, but there is no sense in saying you can use flare and chaff if we do not have threat emitters. You have to have the threat emitters to use your flare and chaff. There has to be an influx of some money. Again we are not competing with Cold Lake, but they put $120 million worth of threat emitters in Cold Lake and zero in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. We actually had a loan of a portable threat emitter last year that was utilized. If somebody could come up with three threat emitters to the tune of $10 million, that would pay for itself over time. Price was one thing, but the other is the ability to do certain training. The province is working very closely with DND, the community and the Federal Government to alleviate some of those obstacles.
Senator Banks: We seem to have an unhappy history in Canada in that, many times we have been penny-wise and pound-foolish. We take the short-term view. Do not be too hard on the Department of National Defence. They take their marching orders from their political masters, do not forget. I think this committee has been on record, as far as money is concerned, as indicating that our armed forces are starved for money. Regrettably, it can be said that perhaps Canadians, and I will except Newfoundland and Labrador from this, are getting the military they want. We had a town hall meeting here last night and it is pretty clear where Newfoundlanders and Labradorians came down. They believe that they need, want, and are prepared to pay for a military that looks after Canada's national interest. One of our jobs is it get that message out around the country, and we are doing what we can in that respect. We will certainly bring the message back to Ottawa, but good luck to you in having your political champions in Ottawa carry the day, because that is really going to determine the outcome of this question, I think, in the last analysis. Thank you for giving us this opportunity to hear it firsthand. Thank you, Chair.
The Chairman: On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank the three of you for coming before us. We recognize the seriousness of the problem. We are grateful to you for focussing our attention on it once again. We will be happy to receive your brief, Mr. Mayor, and we have taken note of all of the points you have made.
Colleagues, before us now is Richard Deering, the Chief of Police for the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, RNC. He is a career police officer and is now into his 35th year in the profession. He spent 31 years with the Ontario Provincial Police, retiring as Chief Superintendent. In 2001, he was appointed as Chief of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and is headquartered in Fort Townsend, St. John's.
Also with us is Chief Superintendent Bill Smith who was born and raised in Sidney, Nova Scotia. He began his career with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in 1979. Over the course of his service, Chief Superintendent Smith has worked in general duties, uniform, major crime, highway patrol, Aboriginal/visible minority policing, finance, administration, training, VIP duties, and criminal operations. Chief Superintendent Smith is a recipient of the Commanding Officer's Commendation, the RCMP Long Service Medal, the RCMP Bronze Clasp, and the Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal.
Welcome to the committee, gentlemen. We are very pleased to have you here before us. We understand that you both have a short statement.
The floor is yours, Chief Deering.
Mr. Richard Deering, Chief of Police, Royal Newfoundland Constabulary: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary has been providing police service and security to the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador in one form or another since 1792. Currently, the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary is one of two provincial police services in the province, and provides policing on a deployed basis through its detachments in St. John's, Mount Pearl, Conception Bay South, Corner Brook, Labrador City and Churchill Falls. For those not familiar with the province, St. John's, Mount Pearl and Conception Bay really form what is known as the Northeast Avalon Peninsula.
The existing service consists of 330 uniform members and 80 civilian employees, and is headquartered at Fort Townsend in St. John's. The Royal Newfoundland Constabulary enjoys a very positive and cooperative working relationship with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the other provincial police service. As well, we have a strong working partnership with all federal and provincial agencies mandated enforcement and regulatory responsibilities in the province.
Ports Canada Police operated in the province from 1967-97 with responsibility for policing the major ports. In particular, there was a large contingent of officers in St. John's who provided police service to the ports in St. John's and Long Pond. Long Pond is in Conception Bay, which is about 20 miles from here.
On November 30, 1997 the Ports Canada Police were disbanded and the responsibility for providing police service fell to the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. According to one of my predecessors, there was very little consultation in the matter, and there were no additional monies allocated to the province relative to this downloading of policing responsibilities.
Since that time, the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary has provided police service to the ports in St. John's, Long Pond and Corner Brook on the west coast, on a stand-in-line, priority basis. Very little is being done in relation to these ports on a pro-active basis, and our presence there is relatively reactive in nature.
Today's Royal Newfoundland Constabulary is committed to the provision of quality, front-line police service through integrated, intelligence-led policing. The collection, analysis and dissemination of criminal intelligence are an integral part of that philosophy. From that perspective, we are working daily to ensure that we are as well positioned as possible to effectively address crimes in the communities that we police.
Until recently, Newfoundland and Labrador has enjoyed many benefits of being insulated from the rest of the world. Globalization has changed that and has brought many opportunities for growth and development to the province. Unfortunately, organized crime groups also realized the opportunities for growth, and from a policing perspective, we are seeing a significant increase in criminal operations that are directly linked to organized crime.
The manifestation of this is evident in the marked increase in drug importation, drug addiction, morality crimes, pornography, electronic crime, commodity smuggling, sophisticated fraud schemes and incidents of extortion and intimidation.
Obviously, most of the crimes are not committed at our ports. However, organized criminals are not venue-exclusive and, as you are aware, they are very intelligent, sophisticated, strategic and well resourced. They feast on opportunity, and will operate wherever the police are vulnerable, particularly in areas of low resistance. There is no doubt that organized crime groups operating in this province have links to our ports.
Newfoundland and Labrador played an important role in the aftermath of 9-11. When the national strategy on port security was developed, it made perfect sense to focus resources on the ports of Vancouver, Montreal and Halifax. It is my belief that the added focus on these ports was successful in addressing some of the security issues there.
It is also my belief that the criminal elements have adapted and are now operating strategically in other major ports in Canada. This includes those in our province. I ask you to consider this when analysing the effectiveness of what we are doing in relation to port security from a national perspective.
Our ports are vulnerable. Organized crime appears to be cementing a toehold in our ports, and we need to challenge them aggressively at the first opportunity.
We need your help in securing the resources required to combat security issues in our ports in a meaningful, full- time manner.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Chief. I wish I could share your view that things are better in the other ports, but that is certainly not the view of the committee. We wish they were, but we have a really big port problem in this country. We are glad to hear from you about it.
We look forward to hearing from you, sir, now.
Mr. Bill Smith, Chief Superintendent, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: Good morning, honourable senators. I am the officer in charge of Criminal Operations Branch for B Division, Newfoundland and Labrador. As the officer in charge of the Criminal Operations Branch, I am responsible for all operational policing programs under contract in various communities within Newfoundland and Labrador. I also oversee the federal policing program that includes drug and customs enforcement, coastal watch, and criminal intelligence for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
My objective today is to highlight the role of the RCMP in Newfoundland and Labrador as it relates to marine and port security. I will discuss briefly the operational framework in Newfoundland and Labrador, paying particular attention to resources available to the RCMP through protocols with related government agencies to assist the RCMP in addressing marine security.
The RCMP utilizes the "integrated policing model'' with an emphasis on partnerships and intelligence-based decisions. In Newfoundland and Labrador, this model promotes and enhances close working relationships with federal and provincial agencies such as the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, Canadian Coast Guard, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Canadian Border Services Agency, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the provincial Emergency Measures Organization and other municipal investigative/enforcement agencies. Firm partnerships ensure that obstacles are reduced and, where possible, innovative mutual solutions created. These solutions and responses are put into effect in an integrated fashion, taking advantage of each agency's limited resources and working towards a common goal.
From integration comes the sharing of information and intelligence. Armed with reliable and credible intelligence, our integrated enforcement teams effectively and efficiently pool resources in a coordinated manner. The RCMP's strategic focus on intelligence allows us to gather and share intelligence with partner agencies, and vice versa. Each member of the RCMP is encouraged and expected to participate in the modern-day approach of intelligence sharing. This same approach is applied to our partner agencies.
In taking this approach, if there is a threat against our national security or a significant event occurring within or outside of our provincial jurisdiction, the RCMP, with partner agencies in Newfoundland and Labrador, have the ability to respond to the event in a coordinated and effective manner. An example of this coordination was the response to the 9-11 terrorist attacks in the United States when 77 international commercial flights were unexpectedly diverted: 27 to St. John's; 37 to Gander; 8 to Stephenville; and 5 to Goose Bay. This created an influx of 12,500 stranded passengers and crews.
Focussing on marine security, I believe it is important to illustrate how integration and the operational frameworkoperate at the provincial level. The RCMP has strategically located 48 policing offices throughout the province, 45 of which are situated in coastal communities. All personnel are required to gather and disseminate information continuously in a timely fashion. The information is evaluated, analyzed and utilized to identify targets for investigation, or provided to partner agencies for their use as intelligence or enforcement. Information and intelligence are placed into specific databanks for later retrieval by authorized personnel.
The RCMP in Newfoundland and Labrador is a major stakeholder in Criminal Intelligence Service Canada, CISC. Our bureau, Criminal Intelligence Service Newfoundland, CISN, is comprised of 4.5 positions, which includes one member of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. The focus of this office is on organized crime. In addition to these immediate resources, CISN is comprised of two level-one agencies and 15 affiliate partners. CISN is an active participant in the "Strategic Production Cycle,'' in which all partner agencies are invited to identify organized criminal organizations within their jurisdiction. In preparation for the 2005 Integrated Threat Assessment on Organized and Serious Crime, CISN has identified numerous organized crime groups operating within this province.
In 1997, in an effort to enhance and streamline operations within our own intelligence program, we successfully integrated into one unit our Division Criminal Analysis Section, Criminal Intelligence Section, Criminal Intelligence Service Newfoundland and National Security Investigation Section. This enables a sharing of roles and responsibilities, producing a streamlined and efficient effort.
One of the primary objectives of the RCMP in Newfoundland and Labrador is to identify and dismantle organized crime and individuals that pose a threat in criminal activity. This impacts the social values and stability of society, not to mention the continued economic viability of government.
The Division Intelligence Steering Committee, DISC, which is chaired by the Officer in Charge, Criminal Operations, identifies areas requiring intelligence or enforcement action based on a recognized threat assessment matrix.
At a regional level, the Regional Intelligence Steering Committee, RISC, of which I am a member, is comprised of senior managers from all Atlantic provinces. RISC identifies the largest threats to the region and takes the appropriate action.
A recent successful investigation identified by RISC was Operation "Bullwinkle.'' Initiated through and based on criminal intelligence, a multi-agency team targeted a criminal organization operating within the Avalon Peninsula. High-end automobiles and illegal drugs were the primary commodities. An eight-month investigation resulted in the seizure of 12 high-end vehicles, and large quantities of illegal drugs and money. At the present time, 34 individuals from British Columbia, Ontario, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland and Labrador are before the courts for a variety of charges stemming from this investigation.
In terms of action plans, there are a couple that you should note. One is the RCMP B Division Contingency Plan, designed to address major incidents requiring the deployment of extraordinary resources and assets in conjunction with partner agencies, other RCMP Divisions and National Headquarters. The plan is based on the RCMP National Mobilization Plan. The National Counterterrorism Plan ensures public safety by providing an effective and coordinated policy and operational response by government, law enforcement agencies and other organizations with public safety responsibilities. It is oriented to complement the Division Counterterrorism Contingency Plan.
The Division Emergency Operation Centre, DEOC, located in B Division Headquarters, also maintains up-to-date copies of the Offshore Oil and Gas, Contingency Plan, and Contingency Plan for Suspicious Aircraft. DEOC can be activated within a matter of minutes and can function 24 hours a day, if and when necessary.
The RCMP, when required, is able to draw on resources in the Atlantic Region to address any threat, or to assist in conducting investigations.
In terms of human resources, we have approximately 33.5 resources assigned to marine and airport-related activities, including 6 in the Federal Enforcement Section; 1 in Coastal Watch; 17 in the Customs and Excise Section; 2.5 in the Criminal Intelligence Section; 1.5 in the National Security Investigation Section; and 5.5 in the Division Analysis Section. It should mentioned that marine and airport security are among the many responsibilities these units are tasked to perform, not the only ones.
The Coastal Watch program consists of one peace officer who coordinates the program for the whole province. This individual relies heavily on frontline RCMP personnel to educate the public and assist them in recognizing what to report.
The RCMP in Newfoundland and Labrador enforce both provincial and federal statutes on the many inland bodies of water. In addition, we are also responsible for patrolling the 28,956 kilometres of saltwater shoreline using the following assets. I have the list of assets here. To save the committee time, I can read them.
The Chairman: If you would table them with us, Mr. Smith, that would be very helpful. Table them as opposed to read them.
Mr. Smith: In terms of relations with the Canadian Coast Guard, Department of National Defence, RCMP, and the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, the RCMP in Newfoundland and Labrador enjoy a close working relationship with the Canadian Coast Guard, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, and the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary, both at managerial and working levels. The RCMP, for a number of years, has utilized Coast Guard and Fisheries vessels for enforcement and search and rescue and training. Training includes joint sessions in armed ship boarding and small craft operation with Coast Guard personnel. Land-based joint training and scenarios with the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary are also encouraged.
While no naval vessels are stationed in Newfoundland and Labrador, the RCMP is still able to take advantage of coastal patrols in DND vessels. Several times a year, members of the RCMP board DND vessels and conduct visible coastal patrols around the province.
B Division has an Emergency Response Team, ERT, comprised of 12 positions, which is part of a 45-member Atlantic region team. Members of the team are trained in armed ship boarding and have equipment necessary to do this. If necessary, the teams will utilize Canadian Coast Guard and Department of National Defence platforms. Such was the case during the "Cod War'' in 1996 when ERTs from both B Division and H Division in Nova Scotia were used in the arrest of the fishing vessel Estai, 260 nautical miles offshore, southeast of Newfoundland.
In terms of impediments in marine security, the most significant impediment to marine and airport security is the lack of dedicated resources to cover the whole province. Newfoundland is an island with 9,871 kilometres of shoreline. The vast mainland territory of Labrador has 8,172 kilometres fronting the Atlantic's Labrador Sea. Numerous islands add 10,913 kilometres more, giving the province an astonishing grand total shoreline of 28,956 kilometres. Inland, both regions are scattered with thousands of freshwater lakes, ponds and rivers. In comparison, the provinces of Prince Edward Island, 1,260 kilometres; Nova Scotia, 7,579 kilometres; and New Brunswick, 2,269 kilometres; have a total saltwater shoreline of 11,108 kilometres, approximately one-third the size of this province.
In short, the RCMP and partner agencies do not have the ability to observe our entire province on a 24/7 basis. Early detection and intervention are absolutely necessary if we are to have any impact on organized crime or terrorist groups using our shores.
The RCMP in Newfoundland and Labrador has one dedicated patrol vessel, the Simmonds. However, this craft is primarily tasked with Customs and Excise enforcement between the French islands of Saint-Pierre and Miquelon and the south coast of Newfoundland.
The RCMP requires additional dedicated intelligence resources to address such things as continuous intelligence in our many ports and, as well, Integrated Border Enforcement Team, IBET, positions. In the post 9-11 era, many provinces have received additional resources for a variety of reasons. However, the RCMP in Newfoundland and Labrador has not received additional resources, despite being totally surrounded by water and the first entry to Canada from the east. The same is true for our Criminal Intelligence Section and National Security Investigation Section, which are comprised of 2.5 and 1.5 positions respectively. In short, we have an intelligence unit of 4 investigators for the whole province.
Since 9-11, much has been written concerning terrorism in a global society. From the intelligence available it is unlikely that Newfoundland and Labrador would be a direct location for a terrorist attack. However, its geographical position, vast isolated coastline and limited policing resources make it a primary entry and staging point. Criminal organizations have used our shores for many years for large offloads of illegal drugs, with much success. Terrorists could also use our shores in the same means, but for a larger cause. At present, Newfoundland and Labrador is an unchallenged gateway into North America.
As a nation, or even a continent for that matter, we are only as strong, when it comes to national security, as our weakest link. I would suggest Newfoundland and Labrador is such a weak link in its present situation. Our adversaries utilize a "path of least resistance'' mindset, and will take any lack of visible deterrence as an opportunity to commit their illicit activities.
There are many other large ports in the province aside from St. John's, which receives the most attention as it is located in the capital city. For example, the port of Come By Chance, Whiffen Head carries the largest amount to tonnage of any other Canadian Port. As well, Argentia is the only port in the province that receives foreign container traffic that has not already been processed through the ports of Halifax or Montreal. All ports, no matter where they are located in the province, lack dedicated resources to protect against organized crime.
In terms of present and future initiatives, the RCMP continues to integrate fully with other partners with the goal of the seamless delivery of services. We take every opportunity to clearly state our need for additional resources, especially those related to border integrity.
The RCMP, Newfoundland and Labrador, has adopted integrated policing, and, as demonstrated throughout my presentation, has aligned with other federal and provincial agencies. This has allowed the following relationships and coordination to be developed. The sharing of information and intelligence with other agencies allows us to focus our limited resources and efforts in an effective and efficient manner. The integration of internal units within the RCMP allows for focussed and streamlined service. Such is the case with our Criminal Intelligence Program in which investigators and analysts work in partnership rather than silos. The Federal Council Subcommittee on Security which I chair, we have a threat assessment group, which is in your package as well for further information. As well, a host of exercises that test our emergency response skills are tabled in the document and listed as well, whether they be communications or actual responses.
I thank you for the opportunity to appear before your committee with respect to marine security, and look forward to any questions you may have. I am providing you with an information package which further explains the issues discussed today.
The Chairman: Thank you, Chief Superintendent. Can I have just one point of clarification before we go to the questioners? You mentioned the Simmonds. It is a commissioner class vessel. We had been advised, previously, that this was not a suitable vessel for patrolling. It was instead a mobile detachment that went from location to location. Have we been misinformed?
Mr. Smith: To a certain extent. The Simmonds is limited in its capabilities during certain times of the year. During the summer months, it is capable of patrolling the entire Atlantic Region, if necessary, which it has done on various occasions — incidents such as Burnt Church and things like that in the past. In the summertime, it can patrol the entire coast of Newfoundland and Labrador, if necessary. We try to plan those patrols, and we have planned one just recently, which fell through for other operational reasons. In the wintertime, it has limitations. I believe it is restricted to 20 nautical miles from a point of refuge, which means it could not be any more than 20 miles offshore.
The Chairman: Thank you for clearing that up. Senator Meighen you have the floor.
Senator Meighen: Thank you very much for coming. I will not always know who is best to answer, so you will have to make that determination, if you would not mind.
To begin by way of a comment, as far as you are concerned, Chief Superintendent Smith, it sounds to me as if you could give lessons to many other jurisdictions in Canada with respect to the great progress you have made in integrated policing. If we can accept at face value, which I am sure we can, what you have said here, that does not exist, I can assure you, in many parts of the country. It sounds like you have the file, at least, completed and put to bed. Are you as satisfied as I read in your comments with the integrated policing structure in the province?
Mr. Smith: I cannot take full credit for it. I know the RNC is actually a big part of our efforts as well.
We are fairly pleased with our progress. We are not done.We have a lot more work to do, we believe. Part of ourpost 9-11 examination — I arrived in this province after that — has been to create committees, if you will, and exercises that will facilitate the sharing and exchange of information, and the operational readiness of the province as a whole to respond to any type of emergency. However, I do not think we can rest on laurels. We have done a lot, but a lot of these relationships have to be nurtured as well.
Senator Meighen: If I read your presentation accurately, what you really need are additional resources, financial and human, to close the gaps that you have outlined.
Mr. Smith: We would very much welcome that.
Senator Meighen: What about first responders? Are they plugged into this integrated model? Chief Deering, perhaps that is better directed to you.
Mr. Deering: In terms of specialty policing, I suppose that would be an accurate statement, but in general terms, the answer is no. Based on my Ontario experience, integration here is relatively simple because there are only two of us in the province. From a turf war and ego perspective, it is fairly simple to try and manage those issues. However, the reality is that neither of us have enough resources to do the job as well as we should. We are always searching for ways to integrate, and to find the efficiencies that will perhaps overcome some of the lack of resources that we need to do the job.
Senator Meighen: With respect to, for example, fire department, do you have a relationship there? Do you have a plan in the event of a disaster of any kind?
Mr. Deering: Oh, I am sorry, I took it as first responders from a police perspective. Yes, we have good working relationships with the other emergency service providers in the province. There are a number of plans in existence, and those plans are exercised on a regular basis. From the perspective of an Emergency Measures Office, EMO, from a coordination point of view, there are ongoing meetings. All the partners are at the table and we do work in a collaborative way to ensure that, in terms of a crisis, we can respond in an effective and an efficient manner.
Senator Meighen: As far as the port is concerned, do you regularly patrol the port, or do you do so when called?
Mr. Deering: In general terms, we respond to the port when called. The port of St. John's is in the middle of our province's capital, so on general patrol our officers are in the vicinity of the port. From a visibility perspective, people would see our cars from time to time but we respond to an average of 30 calls a year to the port in St. John's that would require criminal investigation. Other than that, we do not go to the port. The St. John's Port Authority has two peace officers who, I am lead to believe, are there to handle parking issues on the apron, and things of that nature. They would be present on the port a fair bit, but their powers and resources are limited so we do not really have a presence in the port. As I said, it is stand-in-line on a priority basis so if we get a call at the port and there is a call of a higher priority going on in the city, the port has to wait.
The Chairman: Excuse me, sir. When you say "peace officer,'' are you saying they operate under the Criminal Justice and Police Act, or are they security guards?
Mr. Deering: I believe they are security guards.
The Chairman: Thank you, sir.
Senator Meighen: Is the port fenced? Is the access controlled in any way?
Mr. Deering: No.
Senator Meighen: You said that, in your opinion, organized crime had gained a toehold in the port of St. John's. Is this something that has occurred since 9-11?
Mr. Deering: I think it has become more visible perhaps because we are more acute to watching for it. Organized crime has a significant toehold in the Northeast Avalon. As I said in my presentation, there is no doubt that the ports are one of the venues where they look for opportunities. There is some intelligence to lead us to believe that organized crime is active in the ports.
Senator Meighen: Is there any cooperative effort underway now with the Port Authority to try and enhance security?
Mr. Deering: No.
Senator Meighen: There are only 24 hours in a day, I appreciate that, and resources are limited, but is this because of a resistance to it, or because it has not gotten underway yet?
Mr. Deering: It is strictly an issue of resourcing. To be very honest, senator, I have trouble putting people on the streets on a 24/7 basis for frontline police service. We do not ignore the port, but the port is just an extension to one of the patrol zones that we do. We do not pay particular attention to the ports unless we have some intelligence information that leads us to believe that something significant is happening there, and then we focus on it. Chief Superintendent Smith referred to Operation "Bullwinkle.'' I think that is a prime example of where we focus our energies, the limited energies that we have, on a specific problem, and we do have success. In my community, crime is rampant and linked directly to drugs. The marijuana that we seize in Newfoundland comes from British Columbia. There are only two ways to get commodities into this province: You can fly it in, or you can bring it in on a boat. We get the tip of the iceberg. We probably come in contact with less than 5 per cent of the illegal drugs that come into this province so it is happening on a daily basis. It is my view, based on my 35 years in policing, that a lot of it is coming through the ports. Having said that, stuff that comes into the port here, and into Long Pond, in most cases comes through Montreal or Halifax.
Senator Meighen: You have a lot of foreign vessels coming into the port of St. John's. Do I assume correctly, that you would not know who comes ashore necessarily from those vessels?
Mr. Deering: Absolutely. On a daily basis there are foreign vessels in here. We see the crews of these vessels in our community, and we interact with them from time to time on a professional basis. The reality is, senator, we have no clue how many get off, how many get back on, who they are or where they came from. In 2002, we had a case where we found human remains in the vicinity of the port in Long Pond. Through extensive investigation, we have been unable to identify who those remains are. It is our considered belief now that it was probably someone from a foreign vessel that was possibly murdered in Newfoundland and Labrador, and the chances of solving that crime are relatively nil. Again, I think that points to the fact that we have no idea who is on our soil at any time, from a foreign vessel perspective.
Senator Meighen: Are either of you familiar with the International Ship and Port Security Code, ISPS Code?
Mr. Smith: Yes I am familiar with it. The July 1 one this year, yes.
Senator Meighen: Yes, I think it came into effect in July 2004. Transport Canada said that by September 2004, Canadian marine facilities were 98 per cent compliant. Was the port of St. John's, to your knowledge, part of the 98 per cent or part of the 2 per cent?
Mr. Smith: From our point of view on the ISPS Code, we have been watching for an impact on us in terms of resourcing and impacts. I cannot speak to the level of compliance of any of the ports, but just to say that it has not had a major impact on our resources so far to date anyway in terms of demands. They have different levels I am not totally familiar with, Inmarsat 2, 3, 4, and at some of those levels that it kicks in, police resources are involved in another response.
Senator Meighen: Would we have to talk to the Port Authority personnel to find out?
The Chairman: You said major impact: any impact?
Mr. Smith: Early on, as you well know, when there was a real scramble. We had communications from our headquarters to be on the alert that we may have to dedicate some resources, but it did not have any negative impact that I know of.
Senator Meighen: So, no impact?
Mr. Smith: No.
Senator Meighen: I think I would best pass on to some of my colleagues. Thank you very much.
Senator Cordy: Thank you very much. I would like to follow up on Senator Meighen's line of questioning regarding security. If there is no fencing around the port, how easy is it to access the cargo and the ships that are in your port? These are perhaps better addressed to Port Authority people, but you would certainly be the person who would be called if there is a problem.
Mr. Deering: Of course, there is always access from the water side of the port. From the terra firma side of the port, I believe there are security measures in place around the Oceanex complex, which would be the place where most containers arrive but in terms of other piers, there is very little. What is interesting to note is that the oil industry is a burgeoning industry here in Newfoundland and Labrador, and I am led to believe that we produce about 40 per cent of the nation's light crude oil. The main access point to the ships that go back and forth to these wells is right down the road here at Harvey's Pier. To the best of my knowledge, anyone who wants to walk up to the pier or to boats is able to do so.
Senator Cordy: It would be extremely easy if one were to do minimal planning to have access to a container to either retrieve material that would have been sent from another port or to, in fact, plant cargo on a container or on a ship?
Mr. Deering: Yes, that is my sense of it. Just to exacerbate that from my perspective, the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary does not have access to any vessels. If we had a water incident in the port, we would have to depend on our federal or provincial partners to assist us, or we would have to depend on a local fisher person to provide a vessel for us so we could conduct an investigation.
Senator Cordy: What department could board a boat, DFO?
Mr. Deering: DFO, the Canadian Coast Guard, or the RCMP when their vessel is available.
Senator Cordy: I was going to ask about employees having access, but indeed if anybody can have access, then I guess employees certainly would have no need for an ID badge on the premises.
I guess my next question also was a follow-up to Senator Meighen's, and that is regarding immigration. I am from Halifax, so certainly I know that if anybody is going to stow away, then this would certainly be the location that they would disembark the ship. You would have the same good news, bad news for the first port entry for those ships coming from overseas. How many people do you have, or do you know, who would leave their ship in Newfoundland and Labrador with the intention of staying?
Mr. Deering: I cannot be specific in terms of numbers, but it is, again, my considered belief that it is happening, and I would say on a fairly regular basis. I cannot speak for the immigration department, but it is my sense from talking to my contemporaries at that department that they are as strapped for resources as we are. It is also my sense that from time to time when foreign vessels arrive here that immigration perhaps is done on the honour system or from a call-in system. I do not know that to be certain, but that is my sense. Again, when a foreign fishing vessel arrives here to refuel or to take on provisions, I am not sure if anyone from a security perspective knows who really gets off that boat and who gets back on it. Once they get off the boat, they have access to Canada, and, as we know fairly well, to the United States, if they wish to be devious enough.
Mr. Smith: If I can add to that, not speaking specifically of St. John's but a couple of places in the handout that I provided to you, page 21 speaks of immigration and several instances here in the province where people have left ships. Also, under the port of Argentia, page 27 speaks about an incident in January 2004 where three people jumped ship from the MV Skogafoss, and they were from Iran, Eritrea and Iraq respectively, so there is a huge possibility that this could happen.
Senator Cordy: What percentage of immigrants are actually making themselves known to immigration when they land, or do you have any knowledge of that information?
Mr. Deering: I do not have any facts or figures, and even in the case where they make themselves known, we find that they make their way to the mainland before they are dealt with through the immigration process. Some, I imagine, are never heard from again or certainly not for some long time. We lose track of them here.
Senator Cordy: What responsibilities do the shippers have for stowaways? I know there was a problem a few years ago about the perception that, in fact, a shipper had dumped a stowaway in the ocean, never to be heard from again because of the costs involved when the shipper arrived onshore. What, in fact, are the responsibilities of the shipper if a stowaway is found or if somebody leaves a ship?
Mr. Deering: I would be out of my realm really to comment on that with any certainty.
Senator Cordy: What are the main problems at the port? I know you mentioned drugs. Is that the main criminal activity at the port?
Mr. Deering: One is commodity smuggling, and it could be human cargo, drugs, high-end vehicles, or any commodity where organized criminals have an opportunity to turn a profit.
Senator Cordy: The smuggling of humans is certainly one of the biggest, fastest growing smuggling areas. Are you finding that in Newfoundland, or are they just using Newfoundland to move through quickly, and so you do not know who is coming through?
Mr. Deering: We know it is happening, but we do not know how regularly it is happening. Again, I go back to my Ontario experience as Chief Superintendent in charge of Eastern Ontario. With Akwesasne located in my geographic region, I know that human smuggling was increasing, and it is my sense that it is happening here. Unfortunately, at this point in time, I cannot say specifically how serious the matter is, but it is my sense that it is happening.
Senator Cordy: And growing?
Mr. Deering: And growing.
Mr. Smith: I agree with that statement.
The Chairman: Chief Superintendent, I thought in your presentation you described to us that you had integrated teams which included the Canadian Border Services Agency, CSBA. You must have a fairly clear knowledge of whether they are keeping track of who gets on and off vessels.
Mr. Deering: I am not saying that at some level we do not have knowledge. I do not have the knowledge, personally, in terms of numbers or how often it happens. We work with the CBSA; we do share information.
The Chairman: You do not know whether they are contacting every vessel that comes in and determining who leaves and what comes onto Canadian soil from the vessels?
Mr. Deering: I do not have that level of knowledge, no.
The Chairman: Then what does your integrated team do?
Mr. Deering: Most of these projects with the CBSA would be focussed operations in terms of some investigation that we are going to complete, but not generally a broad picture. At this point of time, to be honest with you, we are very much collecting that information, if you will.
The Chairman: When we talk to other integrated teams in other ports they can give us information right down to the percentage of people working in the port who had criminal records. We got very detailed information from your counterparts in other divisions.
Mr. Deering: I know you have, and I have read some of that commentary. We do not have that information here, unfortunately.
The Chairman: Why is that, sir?
Mr. Deering: We have an intelligence gap. It is because we do not have the resources to dedicate to the port situation. As I stated earlier, we have 4.5 people to gather that intelligence, and a whole host of issues aside from marine security to address as well. There is an intelligence gap there. I would have to admit that for sure.
The Chairman: Okay. We will come back to it. I am interrupting the chain of questioners.
Senator Atkins: Thank you, gentlemen, for being here.
Just to follow along on the drugs question, you indicated that it was a major element for crime in the city or in the province, and it comes in either by air or by water. As far as air is concerned, does it come in, do you believe, by small aircraft, or does it come through the main airport? How does it get here?
Mr. Deering: The potential is that it could come in a small aircraft. We have no specific information to support where that is happening. It is my belief that a large amount of the drugs that come into this province come in either through the ports or on motor vehicles that are ferried across from mainland Canada to ports in Newfoundland and Labrador. The vast majority of marijuana that we seize here is from B.C. The illicit drugs that we seize here are not manufactured in Newfoundland or Labrador so they are coming in through various access points. A very conservative estimate is that 90 per cent of the property-related crimes that the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary investigates are directly linked to the drug trade.
Senator Atkins: Would that mean, in terms of your responsibility, it is one of the most primary activities of your police force?
Mr. Deering: It is certainly an important aspect of it, and we combat it on a daily basis. We have ongoing investigations and we are continually doing intelligence probes. Senator, I think you have to appreciate that we are a police service that is minimally resourced, from a financial perspective. We struggle on a daily basis to put patrol officers on the streets without incurring overtime so everything has to be done in perspective of what we would really like to do, and what we have to do. It is a priority, unfortunately, to react to crime rather than be pro-active. We are pro-active when we can afford to do that, but most times we react. A case in point, in our jurisdiction, Northeast Avalon, armed robberies in 2004 were up over 100 per cent; break and enters were up in excess of 65 per cent. We have a huge addiction problem to drugs such as OxyContin, Percocet and Ritalin. Many of our young people who are tragically addicted to these drugs turn to prostitution, theft and other things. Unfortunately, we have no treatment facilities in this province. We have to try and find a place to send our young people to on the mainland to be treated for these very tragic addictions.
Senator Atkins: It sounds like you are under crisis management.
Mr. Deering: On a daily basis.
Senator Atkins: The Chief Superintendent referred to limited police resources. This is a funding question. Since 9-11, what would be the increase of your budget on a yearly basis over the last three years?
Mr. Smith: On the federal side, none.
Senator Atkins: None?
Mr. Smith: None. We have had no post 9-11 resources given to us. Probably we received some minor money in terms of operation and maintenance, O and M, to assist us with some investigations. In terms of an overall increase in intelligence resources or resources as a result of Public Security and Anti-Terrorism, PSAT, funding, we did not have any of that.
Senator Atkins: And on the contract side?
Mr. Smith: On the contract side, the province has given us, just recently this year, 11 new positions, and we have one federal position that has just been allotted to us. I guess I should correct that. As of January 1, we have a drug awareness position in Labrador.
Mr. Deering: From my perspective, and I am involved nationally with the Criminal Intelligence Service of Canada and the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, one of my frustrations is that, post 9-11, the money stopped at Halifax. We have seen absolutely nothing in this province to assist us. My concern is that organized criminals are not stupid. They go to where they are going to find the least resistance. The chair has pointed out to me that I am perhaps a little more optimistic than he is in terms of the impact that law enforcement has had on some of the ports. When you put the pressure on Montreal and Halifax, then it is going to show up somewhere else, and probably that is in Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island or other ports in Nova Scotia where there is less pressure. We have seen, from a policing perspective, no evidence of federal dollars post 9-11 to combat the issue. I am not an expert on terrorism, but in my view, terrorists are criminals who are just motivated differently than other criminals. I have a problem trying to differentiate between the two.
Senator Atkins: That suggests that Newfoundland then is a funnel to the mainland.
Mr. Deering: I believe so.
Senator Atkins: How does it get from here to mainland; by truck?
Mr. Deering: Once you are here it is pretty easy to get to the mainland. You can get on a plane at any of our airports, or you can drive to Port aux Basques or Placentia, get on a ferry and go to North Sydney, Nova Scotia.
Senator Atkins: That is very interesting. Chief, how many aircraft do you have?
Mr. Smith: In our division we have a Twin Otter that is posted in Happy Valley-Goose Bay. It is primarily because of the isolation of our detachments there. We have a number of isolated folks in Labrador, which —
Senator Atkins: You have one?
Mr. Smith: One Twin Otter, divisionally; and otherthan the Twin Otter, none. We have a regional Pilatus aircraft, a PC-12 I believe, out of Moncton, which is a regional aircraft for the four Atlantic divisions. We have a regional helicopter as well, a Eurocopter, which is a regional asset as well.
Senator Atkins: We have been told that there is one helicopter for Atlantic Canada.
Mr. Smith: That is correct. Besides that, we have a very good relationship with the provincial emergency measures people on land and in land/water searches. They provide us air support, when required. Also the Canadian Coast Guard has been excellent in terms of their assistance to us when we need it.
Mr. Deering: Senator, if I can just go back to the funding issue, I said that I have seen no evidence of any federal money. That is not completely accurate because we are now negotiating with the St. John's Airport Authority, in terms of working out on a contractual basis, provision of more focussed policing at the airport. That is through funding that Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, CATSA, has provided to various airports across the country.
Mr. Akins: When you prepare a budget, do you prepare it for the municipality, or do you do it for the province?
Mr. Deering: For the province: Policing in this province is strictly a provincial responsibility. It is an interesting relationship because I have all these clients that I try very hard to serve, and try to listen to their needs. However, at the end of the day, they can demand all they want, but from their perspective, they are not paying directly for policing. They get the police service that I provide based on the funding that I get from the province.
Senator Atkins: What you are telling us is that with your request, you really have not received what you have asked for?
Mr. Deering: We are not funded to the point where I would like to say, yes. Recently, we have been provided with some assistance from a fiscal perspective. That equates to additional bodies on the road, but those bodies are there for frontline policing services. The reality of policing in my organization today is that in order to provide adequate policing on the frontline this summer, I had to disband my traffic unit and my street drug enforcement unit to put those people back in uniform and on the street.
Senator Atkins: Just a final question: If you were provided with additional funds, what would your priority be? Would it be human resources, equipment or what?
Mr. Smith: We have all kinds of pressures, as you might imagine, as a police organization. In terms of federal resources, probably the biggest focus would be on intelligence and the gaps that are there for us in that area, because without good intelligence it is very hard to make intelligence-based decisions. The resources we have work very hard to do that. Integrated border enforcement teams, I believe, that have been placed across the country, we would very much like to see those positions here, if possible. We know we have a very good relationship as well with Saint-Pierre and Miquelon — it is in the document I gave — which is another vulnerability from that side as well. It is not a huge one in terms of some of the other partners, I am sure, across the country, but a concern for us. We really have to sit down and take a hard look, but intelligence would be the number-one priority on the federal side of the house.
Mr. Deering: I suppose money would be because that would allow me to hire the people I need, and equip them to the extent required. However, their focus would be for us to have a meaningful presence, both from a visibility perspective and an intelligence perspective, at the port in St. John's and Long Pond, as well as at the airport in St. John's.
Senator Banks: I just want to make sure that I understand, because I am not from Newfoundland. Between the RNC and the RCMP you provide municipal policing throughout Newfoundland, is that correct? There is no St. John's city police force? Who owns the port of St. John's?
Mr. Deering: I am not really certain. The St. John's Port Authority, I believe, has an obvious link to the City of St. John's. I believe also, from a matrix perspective, there is a relationship with the province as well but to clearly articulate what that is, I would be way out of my league. I really would not be able to do that.
Senator Banks: Do you know, or am I remembering correctly, that ports in Canada generally used to be owned and operated by Ports Canada in the same way that all airports used to be operated by the Department of Transport? That transfer of the operational authority and either the leasing capacity or the ownership, in some cases, of those facilities to community-based organizations was something that was not imposed upon those communities, but rather something those communities avidly seemed to wish for. I am describing something that I believe to be true in the rest of the country, and I am wondering whether it was true here. That is to say, did the City of St. John's, in concert with the province, happily take on and establish the Port Authority of St. John's?
Mr. Smith: Again, I had the same understanding that you have. I know there is a St. John's Port Authority, I believe, in Corner Brook. It is the same arrangement there, and I think recently in Stephenville, the Port Harmon Authority has taken over there. I do not know if the rest of the ports in the province have private port authorities or not, but I believe those three have. I have the same understanding that groups were invited to take ownership the same as they would have in the airports across the country.
Senator Banks: And did so happily?
Mr. Smith: I believe so, yes.
Senator Banks: My rude question, which I have asked in other places in the country before, is: When Transport Canada and Ports Canada used to do the policing of those facilities, which they owned and operated and then transferred the ownership and operation, or at least the proprietorship, to local authorities, I believe they also understood that they were transferring the responsibility for security for those facilities to the local authorities. It seems to me, not to put too fine a point on it, the local authorities have said, "We want the icing but you guys keep paying for the cake.'' The Feds, to put it colloquially, are being asked to belly up to pay for security of these facilities. Does that seem right to you?
Mr. Deering: I will not get into a debate about the rightness of it, but I can tell you, from my perspective, I wish it was clearly delineated as to who had responsibility because it would be easier for me to try to access additional resources. It seems to me that the linkage from the federal perspective is that this whole notion of national security is where we, as a country, are most vulnerable. Clearly that would be at our international seaports and airports.
Going back to what happened, and it happened herein 1997 and predates me, my understanding is that at midnight on November 30, the responsibility for policing the Port of St. John's went from the Ports Canada Police to the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. Again, RNC has a very unclear relationship with the City of St. John's in that we police the City of St. John's through an arrangement the city has with the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador so it is not really clear, senator.
Senator Banks: These are, of course, all shared responsibilities. I do not mean to say that the Government of Canada does not have a clear responsibility with respect to crime, particularly federal crimes and the like, but it is not an entirely one-way street, in my view.
Chief, you talked about drugs.
The Chairman: Senator Banks, before you leave that topic, could we just close it out?
Senator Banks: Sure.
The Chairman: If the responsibility is with the St. John's Port Authority, they have the responsibility for policing it. If they want police there, they should enter into a contract with you. If they are not doing so, it is because they are choosing to economize and go without security. The reason for them having the port, presumably — at least that is the case in the all the other communities — is they want to control their own development, and they thought they saw an advantage to their community for doing it. Your relationship, if you have any, and you obviously do not, should be with the port authority. That is what we find a little puzzling as a committee. Actually, we are not finding it puzzling because there is a pattern across the whole country that, as we devolve the ports, the local authorities have chosen to do away with security. It is everywhere. That is why I commented earlier to you that we think it is a disaster. We are sorry to hear that it is also a disaster here. What we seem to be hearing from you is that it is a non-event. Essentially, the committee is shaking its head and saying, "Oh God, another city to add to the list.'' There is a sense of frustration on this side of table, as well, that we are hearing that you too have this problem.
I am sorry, Senator Banks, and I apologize if I seem to have an outburst and not a question.
This committee is on the record as saying the RCMP should have the responsibility for policing ports and airportsthroughout Canada. We would like to see a single entity with that responsibility right across the board, because we see ahodge-podge. Frankly, there has to be the resourcing that goes with it, and that means perhaps recovering things that have been devolved in the past.
Anyway, I am sorry. This is not the way hearings are supposed to go. You are supposed to give us information, and I am not supposed to give you speeches, and I apologize.
Senator Banks: You are exactly right, Mr. Chairman. I agree that if there is going to be federally funded policing largely at ports and airports, and I believe there should be because of the interoperability and the nature of information — exchanging information between the Vancouver airport and the St. John's airport which ought to happen — it is easier if one agency does that. However, that cannot reasonably happen if the entire proprietorship and everything else totally resides in someplace else. Everybody has to belly up to the bar here. I agree with the chair that port authorities and airport authorities often are not.
Chief, you mentioned marijuana a few times, as well as some other drug problems, manufactured drugs. Is marijuana the bulk of the problem? Is it the biggest part of the problem? You talked about amphetamines, Reds and those kind of things, but how about the other colloquially more serious narcotic drugs, heroin and the like? Are they finding their way here, or is the bulk of your problem dealing with marijuana?
Mr. Deering: No, marijuana is an issue. It seems to be something that is culturally accepted and popular here. The biggest issue we have right now is with prescription drugs such as OxyContin, drugs that can be legally obtained. However, there is also a fairly significant presence in terms of cocaine. We do not see a lot of heroin here, but cocaine is here. I forget the name of this stuff that they drink a lot of water with, they dance all night, and carry on.
Mr. Smith: Ecstasy.
Mr. Deering: Ecstasy is fairly common here and those sorts of things.
I feel compelled to say something now, and I am not going to make a speech. In response to Senator Kenny's comments, I hope that the committee does not recommend what I would consider to be the creation of a silo, in terms of trying to hive off port policing to some federal agency that would be independent of the local police service. The reality of the day is that in a community like this, the criminals who are active in ports are active in the community so I think if you are going to recommend something, it has to be from an integrated perspective. I would hate to see this committee come up with a recommendation that says, yes, the RCMP or whoever is going to have complete responsibility for this policing across the country. We have to work together. We have to be integrated because you cannot create a silo that stands in the middle of the City of St. John's and that nothing else is going to interact with, because it is the same people doing the same crimes in our community. I think that would be counterproductive. I think we need to address this from an integrated perspective.
The Chairman: Chief, I encourage you to read our reports. It is clear from your comments, you have not. We would welcome your comments after you have read the reports. When Senator Banks and Senator Forrestall are done, I will have some further questions for you.
Senator Banks: Yes, that is a good idea, Chief, to see what we have said. There is a vacuum in that respect, and all we are saying is that it needs to be filled, and sorry, nobody else is doing it. It is as simple as that.
Senator Forrestall: I defer to the chairman, if I may. My concerns parallel those of the chair, and they have to do with intelligence — intelligence-sharing in the absence of a coordinated, integrated body, anything is possible and anything is better than what we have now. That is not to downplay the splendid work of the Halifax Police Force or any police force in the nation. It is just that they are not linked. There is no good intelligence link between the local police force, community police forces. The Newfoundland Constabulary is quite different and unique, but the rest of Canada has a uniqueness too in its diversity. They are simply not compatible, from the perspective of an inspector who has to live with intelligence, gather it, analyze it, and implement actions as a result of it.
So, I will defer to you, Chairman, because this is for us a very important issue, and he is our resident. We are going to make him a corporal once of these days. He has not made that yet.
The Chairman: I know the system and corporals really run the operation.
Senator Forrestall: That is really what got you to corporal.
The Chairman: I am going to ask you both this question. Would you please describe for the committee what you would consider to be an ideal model for policing the port here, and the other ports of significance in the province?
Mr. Smith: I cannot say I disagree with a consistent approach across the country. I think that is a very good approach. I share Mr. Deering's comments about integration. As you know, part of our main priority now as the national police force is to integrate police agencies. In saying that, I think we would have to have an integrated approach with clearly one group that would lead that approach in some sense. Whether that is the RCMP or not, I guess that is somebody else's decision, but we would certainly like to be there with everybody else: RNC, and other key players such as CBSA and Citizenship and Immigration Canada; all those people that need to be there. I would advocate that for the ports in the province, significant ones, obviously. There are some that are fairly small and they can be probably dealt with on a satellite basis, or whatever if you wish. I think the days are gone of, if I can use the word "silos'' or "vertical policing'' if you want. It has to be a horizontal approach if we are all going to work together to solve the problem.
The Chairman: Thank you. Chief Deering.
Mr. Deering: Gentlemen, in terms I agree with Bill. I think if you look at the agencies that have a common interest in the security of the ports in St. John's or Newfoundland, they are pretty well the same group across the nation, with the exception of the police service of jurisdiction. In Halifax it would be the Halifax Regional Police Service, or in Montreal it would the Montreal Urban Police Service. I think it is important that there is an integrated approach. I think it is important that all the parties who have some responsibility and interest in security at the ports and airports be involved in that model. Who leads it? It does not really matter, but I agree we need to have a common approach in terms of doing the same things here that they are doing in Vancouver, Montreal, Toronto or wherever else it may be. Not to involve the partner agencies, particularly the local police jurisdiction, I think would be a step backwards.
The Chairman: Neither of you commented on the specialized culture language procedures that take place in airports or in seaports. Neither of you commented on having people who were dedicated to that and who are specialized in that. Do you subscribe to the proposition that in order to properly police a port you need to have people who are working on the port on afull-time basis, and who understand the culture or the language, the operations of the port, or do you believe that ports can be policed like any other part of the city?
Mr. Deering: In order to have effective and efficient policing of the ports, because I think they are very unique in their nature, and in the types of criminals and crime that are drawn to them, I think it would be important to have people who are solely dedicated to the policing of those ports. There are important issues to consider such as cultures and linguistic issues; all those things have to be factored in. I think to have one of my constables, who today is making a presentation to one of the schools, to go down and deal with an important issue in the ports is not an effective way to do it. I think you need to have people who are solely dedicated to policing the ports and the airports.
Mr. Smith: I support that statement. I think sometimes when we talk about ports we think of marine ports, but in the whole concept of border integrity, it is important to note that the airports are just as weak a link as seaports, and I would advocate the same approach to each.
The Chairman: Gentlemen, I think you will find we are pretty much on the same line. The committee has taken note and some of us have visited the Port of Rotterdam which impressed us significantly, where they have over 280 dedicated police officers who only work on the port. They also have dedicated coastal police who take care only of coastal issues. They will respond on call, but principally they do not. They have discovered that the calls do not come in a timely way, and they are better to have their own programs and active outreach where they focus on various issues. They have advised this committee that it is astonishing what else comes up when they are focussing on whatever they consider to be the priority of the month, the quarter or the year. Do these things make any sense to you?
Mr. Smith: By all means. I still think, although they are dedicated to those ports, they need to be tied into the greater policing picture. This can be accomplished through integrated intelligence sections as well, so they have the big picture on what is happening. As you say, although the resources would be dedicated there, they have to be aware of the larger issues outside the port that affect what is going to happen at that port.
Mr. Deering: I agree. You cannot separate crime and put it in a nice neat little package and say this is what is happening in the port, but in the rest of the city of St. John's there is no impact. It is completely fluid in nature. As I say, the criminal elements and the organized criminals who are active in St. John's are active in the ports, the downtown bars and anywhere else they can make a profit. There has to be a connection, but I think you need a group focussed specifically on the ports, but who have an ongoing interaction with the policing authorities in the rest of the city and province.
Senator Banks: Can I ask another question on that?
The Chairman: Go ahead Senator.
Senator Banks: We were talking about who should drive the bus in that respect. You have a close association with the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, CACP. Do you know, for example, whether the Halifax Regional Police Force, which has responsibility for the port of Halifax, has an ongoing important daily communications relationship with the City of Montreal Police or the City of Vancouver Police who have similar responsibilities in those cities?
Mr. Deering: I think in terms of specific investigations that would happen as required.
Senator Banks: How?
Mr. Deering: I guess investigators would follow up with counterparts in Montreal if that was where their investigation led them. In general terms, all of us in the collection, analysis and dissemination of intelligence information are linked through provincial bureaus to the Criminal Intelligence Service of Canada. We share a common database so we can all access our criminal intelligence information. We have a provincial bureau here that interacts with other provincial bureau commanders from an intelligence gathering and sharing perspective through the CACP. There are all sorts of initiatives to ensure that we are as integrated as the criminals we are trying to arrest, and that we share information as well as they are, so it is happening. To go to a policy manual and show you would be difficult to do, but I can tell you that on my force, on a daily basis, we interact with police services all over the world in terms of specific investigations.
Senator Banks: Thank you.
The Chairman: Can you identify, or are you aware of, organized criminal groups who are active air side at the airport?
Mr. Deering: Air side?
The Chairman: On the ramps loading aircraft, unloading aircraft, air side as opposed to before you go through a CATSA search.
Mr. Deering: I cannot speak to that specifically. I can tell you in general terms that there are organized crime groups active in this city and in this province. To the extent that they have infiltrated the airport, I cannot say specifically in relation to that.
The Chairman: And the port?
Mr. Deering: Again, the same thing. We know that there are crimes being committed in the ports where there is some linkage to organized crime and commodity smuggling. We know that the Hells Angels are present in our community. We know that Eastern European organized crime is present in our community. We know that traditional organized crime groups are present in our community. To specifically identify the extent and the specific cases, first of all, would be counterproductive in this setting, and it would be difficult for us to do it at this time as well. As I said, we are constantly doing intelligence probes to try and get some sense of where those are, and those eventually develop into investigations.
The Chairman: Chief Superintendent?
Mr. Smith: I have a similar response to that, senator. We have no known intelligence that would tell us that there is an organized crime group air side in St. John's, or in any other airport in the province for that matter, and similarly for the ports. That is not to say that it is not happening. It is possible that something like that could happen and we do not know yet. As the Chief pointed out earlier, most of our drugs and other illegal commodities come via ports and airports, so I guess it is never say never, certainly. We are attuned to it and we look for evidence of that all the time.
The Chairman: I can tell you, on the record, that colleagues and other cities have been able to identify specific families for us, and have been quite specific about who has been active air side, and likewise, who has been active in the ports. If you are not encountering them, does that tell you that you have a lower incidence here?
Mr. Smith: Not necessarily. We may not have credible enough intelligence or information to give us that picture yet, and that is something we continue to pursue all the time.
Senator Forrestall: Is there an RCMP presence at the airport?
Mr. Smith: No, not on-site. We are in the airport quite often for various issues, investigations and intelligence gathering, but not on-site at the airport.
The Chairman: Yet there are international flights coming in and out of the airport?
Mr. Deering: That is correct.
The Chairman: Who handles the federal issues? You are called out?
Mr. Smith: If we are called in we will respond. On theday-to-day issues of Criminal Code investigations and whatnot it is handled by our counterparts in the RNC. If there is a federal aspect of it, by all means we would be there to assist.
The Chairman: Do either of you have responsibility for policing at Hibernia?
Mr. Deering: I do not.
Mr. Smith: To the extent that we work with them. We have had some of our members take the familiarization — I cannot name the course for you, but when you get in a helicopter you have to be trained to a certain level in case the helicopter ditches in the sea. We have some joint exercises with Hibernia, their security people.
The Chairman: And with the military?
Mr. Smith: With the military and Hibernia at the same time? Not that I know of. Unless there is interaction there that I am not aware of, but to my knowledge it is the RCMP, Hibernia, and the major corporate people who are involved in that, as well.
The Chairman: Principal responsibility for security on the platform rests with the oil companies?
Mr. Smith: Yes.
The Chairman: Thank you both, gentlemen, for coming and appearing before us. We have found the information to be very useful. I think we have come away with the sense that we need to come back and talk to you more. We appreciate you drawing these issues to our attention. I can assure you that this is an ongoing concern of this committee. We see it as a national problem of some significance. The clerk will ensure that you get copies our reports where we have commented on it. We would be very grateful if, after you read them, you respond in a critical way to them; if you looked at them and said, "Well that is fine, but it would not work here,'' or, "You are not taking into account these other factors.'' We would be pleased to get that sort of feedback from you. We will endeavour to get you copies of the reports that we have made on these issues, and we hope we hear back from you after we send you those reports.
Thank you very much for attending here today. You have been of great assistance to the committee and its work.
The committee adjourned.