THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL FINANCE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Tuesday, April 21, 2026
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance met with videoconference this day at 9:01 a.m. [ET] to study the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2027, except for Library of Parliament Vote 1.
Senator Claude Carignan (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Good morning, everyone. I wish to welcome all of the senators as well as the viewers across the country who are joining us on sencanada.ca.
My name is Claude Carignan, senator from Quebec and chair of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance. I would now like to ask my colleagues to introduce themselves.
[English]
Senator Pupatello: Sandra Pupatello, Ontario.
[Translation]
Senator Gignac: Good morning. Clément Gignac from Quebec.
Senator Galvez: Good morning. Rosa Galvez from Quebec.
Senator Cardozo: Good morning. Andrew Cardozo from Ontario.
[English]
Senator M. Deacon: Good morning and welcome. Marty Deacon, Ontario.
Senator Ross: Good morning. Krista Ross, New Brunswick.
Senator MacAdam: Jane MacAdam, Prince Edward Island.
Senator Pate: Good morning and welcome. Kim Pate. I live here in the unceded, unsurrendered and unreturned territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe Nation.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Good morning. Martine Hébert, District of Victoria, Quebec.
The Chair: Thank you very much, honourable senators. Today, we are continuing our study of the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2027. We are pleased to welcome, for the next two hours, Karine Paré, Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer, Corporate Management Branch, Public Safety Canada; and Bryan Larkin, Senior Deputy Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
We also have Steven Fiore, Acting Assistant Commissioner, Corporate Services and Chief Financial Officer, Correctional Service Canada.
We also welcome Pierre Tessier, Assistant Deputy Minister, Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Services Branch; and, by video conference, Jonathan Adams, Director General, Finance, and Pamela Harrison, Acting Director General, Service Delivery and Program Management, Veterans Affairs Canada.
Thank you for accepting our invitation to appear this morning. We will begin with opening remarks from Mr. Tessier, Ms. Paré, Mr. Larkin and Mr. Fiore. We will then have questions for you.
[English]
Pierre Tessier, Assistant Deputy Minister, Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Services Branch, Veterans Affairs Canada: Mr. Chair, members, thank you for the invitation to appear today to discuss the Main Estimates for Veterans Affairs Canada.
I would like to begin by acknowledging that the land from which I join you today is the unceded and unsurrendered Algonquin Anishinaabe territory. The peoples of the Algonquin Anishinaabe Nation have lived on this territory for millennia. Their culture and presence have nurtured and continue to nurture this land.
It is my pleasure to provide an overview of our proposed spending and key priorities for the coming fiscal year and to answer any questions you may have.
[Translation]
All of us at Veterans Affairs Canada are committed to the work that we do. From ensuring the well-being of veterans and their families to recognizing and commemorating their achievements and sacrifices, we do everything we can to deliver real results for those who have served our country. To do that, we rely on the Main Estimates.
[English]
For the fiscal year 2026-27, we are looking at a budget of $8.17 billion. This is a $340 million increase, or 4% higher than the opening budget from last year and in alignment with our closing budget. This makes Veterans Affairs Canada the second-largest contributor to meeting the government’s NATO spending target.
[Translation]
I also want to point out that more than 90% of the total amount in the Main Estimates is earmarked for direct payments to veterans, their families, as well as program recipients.
[English]
Furthermore, these estimates do not incorporate new funding announced in Budget 2025. However, the net increase in this year’s mains is attributable to higher demand and expenditures across several of our key programs, including: Pain and Suffering Compensation, Additional Pain and Suffering Compensation, the Income Replacement Benefit and housekeeping and ground maintenance services.
Each of these is vitally important to supporting the health and well-being of veterans and their families.
In terms of priorities, the Departmental Plan sets out several.
With respect to service delivery, Budget 2025 invests an additional $184.9 million over the next four years, starting this year, and $40.1 million ongoing for our department to stabilize processing capacity for disability benefits applications and to modernize operational processes and IT infrastructure for our disability benefits program.
[Translation]
Another key priority is veteran employment. Through our National Veterans Employment Strategy, we are mobilizing governments, employers and partners to facilitate veterans’ transition to civilian life.
[English]
This strategy helps them connect with employment opportunities, but also helps employers understand the skills that veterans developed while in service.
On the commemorative side, we will mark important military milestones throughout the year, such as the one hundred and tenth anniversary of the Battle of Beaumont-Hamel on July 1.
[Translation]
Mr. Chair and members of the committee, the 2026-27 Main Estimates provide us with the resources needed to ensure that veterans and their families can lead healthy and dignified lives after their service. In today’s global context, we are more aware than ever of the paramount importance of military service for the safety and security of every Canadian as well as Canada’s sovereignty. Our veterans have done their part, and these Main Estimates reflect our responsibility to in turn provide for their recognition and well-being.
Thank you very much.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Tessier.
Karine Paré, Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer, Corporate Management Branch, Public Safety Canada: Mr. Chair, honourable senators, thank you for the invitation to appear today to discuss the 2026-27 Main Estimates for Public Safety Canada.
[English]
I will focus my remarks on the overall level of funding, the key drivers of year-over-year change, and the major programs underpinning these estimates.
I would like to begin by acknowledging that I come before you this morning on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe People.
As has already been mentioned, my name is Karine Paré. I’m here as the chief financial officer for the department.
[Translation]
Public Safety Canada provides national leadership to ensure the safety and security of Canada and Canadians. Its mission is to build a safe and resilient Canada. The department contributes to our country’s resilience through the development and implementation of innovative policies and programs and the concrete engagement of domestic and international partners.
Public Safety Canada plays a role in three areas that affect Canadians: community safety, emergency management and national security. The department’s Main Estimates reflect its mission to make Canadian communities strong, safe and resilient. The total authorities for Public Safety included in the 2026-27 Main Estimates are $2.3 billion. This represents an increase of $89.9 million or 4.2% from the previous fiscal year.
Of the total authorities in the Main Estimates, $2 billion is grants and contributions funding.
[English]
The most significant item is $1.1 billion for the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements, or DFAA, contribution program. This amount represents a $490.9 million increase in contributions funding for the DFAA program from the previous year.
The long-standing DFAA program provides financial assistance to provincial and territorial governments when response-and-recovery costs from natural disasters exceed what they could be expected to bear on their own. Since the inception of the program in 1970, the Government of Canada has contributed over $9.6 billion in post-disaster assistance payments. The DFAA provides federal financial assistance for natural disasters through a $100-million annual base allocation, with additional funding sought through Treasury Board submissions when disaster costs exceed available appropriations. Because disasters are unpredictable and claims evolve over time, forecasting is evergreen, and payments are planned using semi‑annual estimates that are submitted by provinces and territories. Public Safety Canada actively cash-manages the program to adjust for changing timing and numbers of payment requests while meeting federal obligations.
[Translation]
The majority of the Main Estimates funding, $1 billion, is the result of a reprofile of funds from fiscal year 2024-25 to fiscal year 2026-27, as final payments related to the 2013 Alberta flood orders, the July 2017 B.C. wildfires and the 2018 B.C. wildfires.
The second most significant item included in Public Safety Canada’s Main Estimates is $393.6 million in funding for the First Nations and Inuit Policing Program, or FNIPP, representing an increase of $36.4 million or 10.2% over the previous fiscal year. This program advances the priority of providing policing services that are professional, dedicated and responsive to the needs of First Nations and Inuit communities.
It is important to note that the First Nations and Inuit Policing Program supports the delivery of policing in accordance with tripartite agreements among the federal government, provincial and territorial governments and First Nations and Inuit communities.
[English]
The third most significant item included in Public Safety’s Main Estimates is $148.8 million in funding for the Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program, or ASFCP, representing a $311 million decrease, or 67.6%, from the previous year. This funding will be used to complete the collection from the business phase and to support the individual phase for the collection and destruction of individually owned assault-style firearms.
[Translation]
Mr. Chair, with this overview, my colleagues and I are ready to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Bryan Larkin, Senior Deputy Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: Good morning, Mr. Chair and honourable senators. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee today to speak to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police’s 2026-27 Main Estimates. I am Senior Deputy Commissioner Bryan Larkin, and I am accompanied by the RCMP’s Chief Financial Officer, Samantha Hazen.
[English]
Before I begin, I want to acknowledge that it is a privilege to deliver these remarks on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe Peoples.
As Canada’s national police service, the RCMP plays a central role in advancing the Government of Canada’s commitment to public safety and security. Our mandate is set out in section 18 of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and spans federal, provincial or territorial, municipal and Indigenous policing, as well as national security, protective policing and the delivery of specialized police services in Canada and internationally. The breadth of this mandate requires an integrated policing model and a strong federal presence from coast to coast to coast.
For the 2026-27 fiscal year, the RCMP is requesting total budgetary authorities of $6.29 billion, comprising $5.51 billion in voted appropriations and $780 million in statutory authorities. These resources are necessary to sustain core policing operations; meet our contractual obligations with provinces, territories, municipalities and Indigenous partners; and respond to the evolving public safety and security demands of our nation.
The largest component of these authorities supports Indigenous, provincial, territorial and municipal policing, which represents approximately $3.13 billion on a net basis. This funding enables the RCMP to deliver front-line policing to more than 75% of the geography of our nation through over 700 detachments that serve 150 municipalities, more than 600 Indigenous communities, and many small and isolated locations via our contractual and community tripartite agreements, such as the First Nations and Inuit Policing Program.
Federal policing, which includes serious and organized crime, national security investigations, border integrity and protective policing, accounts for approximately $1.46 billion. These resources support investigations into transnational crime, cybercrime, financial crime and threats to Canada’s democratic institutions as well as the protection of state officials, foreign missions and significant international events hosted in Canada.
The Main Estimates also include $614 million for National Specialized Services, which enable the RCMP to provide forensic, technical and operational support to law-enforcement partners nationwide and globally. These services enhance interoperability as well as investigative capacity across jurisdictions in Canada. In addition, $1.08 billion is allocated to Internal Services, which support the organization’s people, infrastructure, information technology and governance. Investments in capital funding are approximately $451 million, which allows us to continue to modernize RCMP assets, including operational facilities, vehicles and specialized equipment, ensuring safe and effective policing environments for our members and employees.
A significant portion of the estimates — $1.16 billion — supports disability and health benefits payments for current and former RCMP members, reflecting both the size of the workforce and the government’s obligation to those who have served our nation.
[Translation]
A significant portion of the Main Estimates, $1.16 billion, supports disability and health care benefits for current and former RCMP members, reflecting both the size of the workforce and the government’s obligation to those who have served.
Finally, I would note that interim supply includes limited additional authorities for the first quarter of the fiscal year to support operational timing pressures, including major security requirements and benefit-related payments.
[English]
In closing, the 2026-27 Main Estimates provide the RCMP with the resources necessary to carry out its diverse mandate; maintain public trust; support our greatest asset, our personnel; and work collaboratively with partners to keep Canadians safe.
[Translation]
Thank you for your attention. I look forward to your questions.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Larkin.
Steven Fiore, Acting Assistant Commissioner, Corporate Services and Chief Financial Officer, Correctional Service Canada: Good morning, Mr. Chair and honourable senators. Thank you for the opportunity to be with you all today to discuss the budget for Correctional Service Canada.
[English]
My name is Steve Fiore, and I am the Acting Assistant Commissioner of Corporate Services and Chief Financial Officer at the Correctional Service Canada. I am pleased to be joined by Jay Pyke, the Assistant Commissioner for Correctional Operations and Programming, as we speak to the Main Estimates 2026-27.
As per our mandate, public safety is at the forefront of what we do. Across the country, every single day, the dedicated employees of Correctional Services Canada work to promote safer communities for all Canadians. They do that by assisting offenders in becoming law-abiding citizens while exercising safe control of those we supervise in our institutions and communities.
The net increase CSC is seeking is $138 million included in the Main Estimates 2026-27. That will enable the Correctional Service Canada to deliver on its public safety mandate and legislated requirements.
For example, $45.2 million of the increase in funding when compared to last year’s Main Estimates, is dedicated to investments in correctional facilities. We know that many of our institutions were designed decades ago, which can pose certain challenges and risks. For example, aging infrastructure can affect the health and safety of not just the offenders who live in them but also the employees who work there.
Through targeted investments that seek to make upgrades and repairs to some aging facilities, we will promote a healthier environment conducive to offender rehabilitation, as well as the longer-term well-being of our employees.
Contained within the Main Estimates 2026-27 is a request for $143.4 million for funding to cover increases in compensation for certain employees as per the collective agreement. Earlier, I spoke about the tremendous work performed by our employees across the country who supervise offenders in our institutions and our communities. Their work is unique and has certain inherent challenges. In recognition of this, the funding being requested through the Main Estimates recognizes our employees’ significant contributions to maintaining public safety and will ensure that positions continue to be occupied by the most qualified personnel.
In addition to this, funding contained within the Main Estimates will go toward addressing key operating pressures and priorities. This includes continuing to invest in innovative technologies to ensure that we have the best possible response to the threats posed by drones and contraband in our institutions. We are also beginning a pilot program related to the operation of jamming technologies, the feedback from which will inform their further implementation at select institutions in the future.
Increases in the Main Estimates 2026-27 are being partially offset by decreases in a few areas. This is notable in terms of temporary funding for workers’ compensation benefits associated with disability claims of $106.6 million, as well as savings associated with the Comprehensive Expenditure Review amounting to $66.2 million.
It is important to note that savings identified under the Comprehensive Expenditure Review were only made in areas that would not impact our core mandate. Public safety remains paramount. In fact, savings identified throughout the Comprehensive Expenditure Review exercise also focused on how we can transform the way we operate. For example, as already mentioned, changes to certain positions were made so we can better respond to potential threats through the use of technological innovations.
We are confident in our approach, which is focused on streamlining operations and services, modernizing practices and ensuring resources align with the core needs of our correctional system, all while maintaining high standards of safety and security.
[Translation]
Mr. Chair, I look forward to your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We will begin the question period; we have a little more than an hour and a half, so each senator will have five minutes, with the possibility of a second round. Think about that if you want more time with a witness.
[English]
Senator Pate: Thank you to our witnesses.
My questions are for you, Mr. Fiore. We know that $1.3 billion has been invested in rebuilding Shepody. You may be aware that the Correctional Investigator has urged that instead of building that unit — which will likely, by the time it is built, be outstripped by need — that resources be allocated to provincial authorities to develop contracted beds. You are no doubt aware of questions being asked of corrections over the last number of years since the implementation of Bill C-83 have revealed inconsistent information about how monies allocated to external beds in that bill were expended. We know the Parliamentary Budget Officer has indicated that external mental health beds are more efficient, more effective and less costly than the internal beds currently used.
In addition, we know that there are claims by the Correctional Service Canada that hospitals are not interested in contracting those beds. I have actually had conversations with a number of those jurisdictions and have seen the correspondence between the federal and provincial governments, and it usually is a request for the provision of services without necessarily an allocation of resources. But the kind of allocation the Correctional Investigator recommended in his last report has been absent.
I also note, over the last few years, more than $74 million has been paid out in claims because of a lack of accountability on the part of corrections. I’m curious as to how you see these expenditures going forward and if they are likely to reduce incarceration rates, particularly when some of the spending cuts that you alluded to are mostly in the area of programs, libraries and education supports, which we know actually feed the likelihood that people will successfully integrate into the community after.
You mentioned drone technology and jamming techniques. When the Senate did the review of the human rights of federally sentenced persons, there were a lot of discussions with staff about the introduction of contraband being introduced through staff measures. What measures are being taken?
If you don’t have time to get through all of them, we would be happy to receive a written response.
Mr. Fiore: Thank you for the questions, Mr. Chair. Regarding the investment of $1.3 billion for the Shepody initiative, we have some significant infrastructure challenges, and this is a mechanism to address some of that going forward. On a lot of the questions you have here, I defer to my colleague Mr. Pyke for some of the operational aspects if that is okay with you, sir.
Jay Pyke, Assistant Commissioner, Correctional Operations and Programs Sector, Correctional Service Canada: Thank you. That was a lot to unpack, Senator Pate.
In terms of the drone interdiction and the human element with staff coming in, I can tell you we take every threat seriously. In terms of the employee or human element coming through, further to the technology pieces that we spoke on, we also have items, including drug-detection dog teams. We have metal and X-ray scanning devices at principal entrances. We rely heavily on intelligence information, particularly if someone may have been compromised, for example, inside. It is a constant assessment and collection of information in relation to potentially compromised employees or staff that may introduce contraband.
I can tell you that most of our seizures are seized via drone drops that come in from the exterior, throw overs or through visits and correspondence or other means. I’m not pointing to one particular item, but I can say for sure that the majority of the contraband introduced to CSC facilities is being introduced through drone technology and other potential means, like visits or old school throw overs. I will stop there in case you want clarification.
Senator Pate: If you could provide written responses to the rest of the questions, that would be great. Thank you.
Senator Cardozo: I would like to ask a couple of questions about the security of religious institutions, so that’s, perhaps, for Ms. Paré and Deputy Commissioner Larkin.
Could you outline how much is earmarked for the programs dealing with the Canada Community Security Program and the Ontario Anti-hate Security and Prevention Grant? Is that where that money would be? How much are we spending over the next year? Is it more than this year? Perhaps one of you could tell us how you are evaluating what we have done so far.
I think the federal, provincial and local governments and police forces are putting a fair amount of attention on this issue, but it seems to be getting worse. I wonder if you could tell us, Mr. Larkin, what you are seeing when we have these increases in cases of shots being fired at synagogues. How do we get a handle on this incendiary problem, which seems to be getting worse?
Ms. Paré: I can start, and my colleague can finish.
For the Canada Community Security Program, we have, in these Main Estimates, $5.1 million in grants, and we also have a component that is done through contributions, which is $7.6 million, so it is about $12 million or $13 million in total.
In terms of the events you just mentioned that occurred recently, the department was able to reallocate $10 million for those communities to ensure they were able to invest in more security for the Jewish community, obviously. That’s the envelope we have. We’re working in close collaboration with them to ensure that the terms and conditions we have for this program are tailored to their needs and that we can act quickly. We have also made some changes so that we can respond to urgent situations. We qualified the ones that occurred recently as urgent, and we wanted to make sure we were equipped to have the leverage or the tools to support the communities in a better way.
Senator Cardozo: It may be anecdotal that people are not getting the grants assessed, and the money does not flow fast enough. I don’t know how widespread that is, but are you able to overcome that issue?
Ms. Paré: We have been working, as I said, to modernize the way we assess the claims. I cannot necessarily talk about specific situations, but I know we want to make sure that we are responsive and that we assess the demands as they come in and that we are able to flow the funding as quickly as possible.
It is part of good financial stewardship, as well, because we want to make sure that we use our budget that is dedicated to that in the year in which it is attributed to us. I would say in 2025-26 — the year that just closed — we were able to reinject additional funding in order to support the communities.
Senator Cardozo: Thank you.
Mr. Larkin?
Mr. Larkin: Thank you for the question.
Through you, Mr. Chair, it is a wide-ranging approach as to how we are managing the safety of religious institutions in our country. That would fall under our federal policing and our National Specialized Services program.
Under the investment this year in federal policing of $1.4 billion and, of course, the additional 1,000 RCMP through Budget 2025, we were awarded $1.8 billion over the next five years. This year, that allocation is about $591.9 million, but it is really spread out.
It is part of our national security teams, and so in every major urban city in the country, we have what’s called Integrated National Security Enforcement Teams, which are specialized teams that look at national security, foreign actor interference, serious organized crime and connections to the Combined Forces Special Enforcement Unit. We have multiple teams in all these cities that work with the police of jurisdiction.
I can tell you that, obviously, since the initial conflict in the Middle East and what is happening around the world and also with social cohesion and the challenges that we are seeing across our country, we have been very much interlocked with police of jurisdiction — municipal and provincial police services.
Operationally, we have been enhancing and expending money. As part of the new RCMP 1,000, we will see an infusion of money, particularly around our Integrated National Security Enforcement Teams, which provides support to the safety and security of religious faith institutions, schools and other community centres, et cetera. Often, we’re not the police of jurisdiction, and so we’re providing that federal mandate for specialized services through technology and through special operations. Of course, I will also tell you that a portion of that money has been — we have seen a significant increase in protective police operations, so dignitaries and VIPs in our country have been receiving additional and enhanced security measures to ensure their safety.
It is complex to give you a number, Senator Cardozo, through one specific answer of, “Here’s the number of resources, and here is the dollar amount,” but it is tied into a significantly vast amount, where we have been paying significant attention.
Senator Cardozo: If I can just interrupt because of time, what are we missing when this problem is still happening?
Mr. Larkin: Well, I think what we are missing is that —
Senator Cardozo: Not just through the RCMP but all the forces.
Mr. Larkin: I will use an example. Every two weeks, the commissioner convenes every major city chief on a biweekly call that looks at social cohesion, looks at protest rallies, demonstrations and hate crime incidents to develop patterns, and there are a lot of different pieces that have happened.
The Toronto Police Service recently announced a new initiative called the Counter-Terrorism Security Unit, and in that particular case, the RCMP has embedded resources into that team.
Obviously, we provided recommendations around legislation and policy advice through public safety on different pieces. It is a larger dialogue that would likely take another session around social cohesion, community safety, social determinants of health and education. There are so many different pieces that it requires the whole-of-government approach.
Policing will not resolve the challenges around social cohesion. It will not resolve some of the challenges we’re seeing. It is a much broader perspective.
Senator Cardozo: Thank you. It is not just the incident. A shooting at a synagogue sends fear through an entire community that they are not safe, not just in that community, but in the country —
The Chair: Second round, please, senator.
Senator Cardozo: Thank you very much. I was trying not to look at you, Mr. Chair, as I kept going.
The Chair: Just to be fair with every member. Thank you.
Senator Ross: My question is for Mr. Tessier.
The Afghanistan Veterans’ Memorial was announced in 2019, and it took about four years to choose a design, and it has been three years since that was done. The website currently says that you will be breaking ground in 2026, and expected completion is in 2028.
Can you tell me when the ground will actually be broken and a bit about the nine-year timeline to get this project under way, because I think a lot of people are anxiously awaiting the completion of this project?
Mr. Tessier: Thank you for the question.
Through the chair, the information that you have is correct. The design was approved, I believe, in early fall last year, which permitted the contract to be in place for the construction, and the intent is to break ground in the spring or summer. That is the timeline that they are looking at, putting the construction contract in place and breaking ground.
It is moving forward, and that’s really good, especially as we look to commemorate the 40,000 veterans that served in Afghanistan. We continue to put emphasis, not only on the Afghan monument, but across all our communities that have served.
Recently, we had the thirty-fifth anniversary for the Persian Gulf, as well, in Halifax and Ottawa. We’re looking this year at the twenty-fifth anniversary of the National Aboriginal Veterans Monument in June 2026, so there are a number of commemorations that are coming this year.
Senator Ross: Do you know the date of this particular one, and will there be some type of celebration or ceremony around that date that people can participate in?
Mr. Tessier: That’s my understanding. The date is still to be determined, but there is an event being planned.
Senator Ross: I have another question for you. In your remarks, you talked about programs that would facilitate veterans returning to civilian life, employment programs, support for employment and so on. I’m interested in specific programs that would support veterans in entrepreneurship, specifically ensuring that when they are launching entrepreneurial ventures that they do not, in some way, lose benefits, such as disability benefits, given that their entrepreneurial venture may be showing a lot of revenue but not profit. Can you talk about that a bit?
Mr. Tessier: Definitely. I might turn to my colleague, Pam Harrison, in a minute to talk about the program itself.
The main piece around employment — just to put it in context — is that there are approximately 8,000 veterans that are released from the Canadian Armed Forces each year, and we know that 40 to 50% of those veterans are looking for employment. There is a vast interest in working with the industry and veterans to build that larger network.
I will ask my colleague to talk about entrepreneurship in a minute, but I believe you are referencing the rehab program and the Income Replacement Benefit, which lets you accumulate or have income of up to $20,000 before there is an offset in other benefits around the Income Replacement Benefit, which is a program that is put in place when you enter the rehab program or you have a diminished earnings capacity for life, which provides you 90% of your salary when you leave the forces. After the $20,000, there’s a bit of an offset there in terms of the pieces. I will ask Ms. Harrison to provide a bit more on entrepreneurship, ensuring I have gotten all those facts correct.
Pamela Harrison, Acting Director General, Service Delivery and Program Management, Veterans Affairs Canada: Mr. Chair, our focus on veteran employment is designed to improve employment opportunities for veterans in Canada. We’re providing a number of tools and resources to help support veterans find meaningful work, including through entrepreneurship.
One of the initiatives that is in place specific to entrepreneurship is the veteran entrepreneurship and self‑employment initiative, where there are approximately 600 veteran-owned or small businesses owned by veterans. They are self-employed service providers, registered, in the buy veteran directory.
We’re always working very closely with the veteran community and small businesses to further entrepreneurship, volunteerism and ensure a transition of post-service life to secure employment after they leave the Canadian Armed Forces and RCMP.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Hébert: My question is for Mr. Larkin and concerns the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Looking at the estimates set out on page 93 of the budget, I see that the payment related to disability benefits and health care is $1.1 billion out of a total voted appropriation of $5.5 billion. That does seem to be a significant share.
Can you explain or tell us how that compares to other institutions and organizations that are similar to yours? We’ll start from that answer and move on.
Mr. Larkin: Thank you for the question, and I will ask our CFO, Ms. Hazen, to speak to our estimates. Yes, it is a lot of money and we can give you some explanations.
Senator Hébert: Thank you.
[English]
Samantha Hazen, Chief Financial Officer, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: Included in our Main Estimates, indeed, there is a very large number, over a billion dollars, associated with our Vote 15. That vote provides two benefits or services to our members; the largest component is the one that you referenced, which is our members injured on duty benefit, which totals just over $900 million.
The second benefit that is included in that $1.1 billion figure is our health benefits, health and occupational benefits for our members.
Police work is inherently dangerous and challenging with risks. The members injured on duty benefit is a statutory entitlement for our current and former RCMP members.
These payments, in the form of a non-taxable monthly pension, provide financial and health care assistance to members of the RCMP and their families in the event of service-related death and/or injury or illness leading to a loss of their quality of life.
These benefit payments are administered through our colleagues at Veterans Affairs Canada who are responsible for the adjudication of the cases, as well as the payments associated with that benefit to our serving members.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Are there any prevention programs? I understand that some disabilities are attributable to the very nature of the work. Are there prevention programs available to the workers on your teams, to try to prevent certain problems upstream and provide adequate support to people in terms of occupational health and safety, precisely to avoid the unfortunate outcome of drawing disability benefits?
[English]
Ms. Hazen: At the RCMP, indeed, internally through our HR sector, we have a large occupational health and safety branch. We take workplace health very seriously.
Part of the services that we offer are well-being ambassadors that are located not just here in headquarters but, obviously, out in the regions and divisions from coast to coast to coast. We do dedicate quite a bit of time on prevention in order to ensure that our members are well served.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Do you have a benchmark to compare yourself to institutions similar to yours, whether that’s other protective services in Canada or globally?
[English]
Ms. Hazen: I don’t have with me the comparators to other place of jurisdiction. We do perform that type of analysis on a regular basis, but I would be happy to provide that to the committee.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Galvez: My question is for Ms. Paré, but I would also like to have the opinion of Mr. Larkin.
In 2004-25, the contributions for financial assistance for natural disasters were $343 million. Then, in 2025-26, it jumped to $616 million, so double. And in the Main Estimates the request is for $1.1 billion. We are jumping very logarithmically.
You said we cannot predict natural disasters. That’s what you said. But the insured losses are showing the tendency of these disasters happening.
In the last year, the cost of the insured losses was $9.4 billion. My question is: Is this just reactive costs and expenses that are put there as a reaction to what happened, or are you doing proactive activities, together with Mr. Larkin’s institution, in order to be resilient?
You mentioned many times you want to build resilience, but the results show that we are not resilient at all. So what is going to happen this year? How is it going to affect the budget next year?
Ms. Paré: The way the program works is we work with provinces and territories. They need to account for the expenditures they have incurred. This is how we determine when there is an audit process to make sure the expenditures are actually eligible under the program. It takes a bit of time before we can actually pay them.
So that’s the answer to the question about the profile and why we’re moving money from one year to the other, because it is a bit difficult to predict when exactly we are going to have to pay for events that occurred in the past, because there is a process that we need to follow and we need to make sure that the expenditures are eligible.
In terms of prevention, I think it is in building resilience. I will ask my colleague, Ms. El Bied, to come and explain. There is a component in the program where we are working with provinces so that there is an incentive in terms of investing and being more resilient. I’m sure my colleague might have a bit more to add to this.
Kenza El Bied, Director General, Public Safety Canada: Good morning, everyone. It is actually a great question around resilience and how the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements program issues payments.
I would like to share some information.
On April 1, 2025, Public Safety Canada launched the modernized Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements after extensive collaboration with partners and an expert review. The updated program enhanced recovery outcomes and resilience and risk reduction, empowering provinces and territories to develop more flexible funding and solutions for impacted communities.
You asked about the gap between insurance and the DFAA. As I indicated, this program actually has put it forward. The new modernized DFAA was implemented in April 2025. It is still completely new, but the objective is to reach out to that resilience and work with other partners. In addition to that, we are working on advancing the flood insurance program, and that will help in the future.
The DFAA modernization will help us to see those incentives and these changes as we move forward in the new implementation, and the new policy for flood insurance in the future will help to balance that and put resilience up front.
Senator Galvez: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Gignac: Welcome to the witnesses. We have been talking about a topical issue in recent years. For Public Safety Canada, I saw estimates of roughly $65 million for the gun buyback program. Can you give us an update on that? I saw a newspaper article that said the program has not been as successful as expected.
Ms. Paré: Thank you very much for the question. We actually started the declaration period for individuals who own those firearms in mid-January. The declaration period ended on March 31. During the declaration period, the goal was to assess the number of people who filed a declaration. It’s a voluntary program. We have received more than 67,000 declarations in total: 67,221 weapons were declared, with a total of just over 38,000 participants.
Following the reporting period, we are now working on collecting and destroying the firearms. So that will be in the coming weeks up until the end of the amnesty period, which is October 30, 2026. During that time, we will also reopen the program for businesses. That program will be reopened as of April 23. The amount you see in the Main Estimates is the $64 million for individuals and businesses. It covers both.
Due to delays in implementing the program, we are currently working with Treasury Board and the Department of Finance to secure funding for the upcoming Supplementary Estimates (A), which will allow us to provide compensation to individuals and businesses. That was the amount originally allocated for compensation. Now that we know the program will be slightly delayed and will begin in April, we will need the necessary financial authorizations to compensate everyone who participated in the program.
Senator Gignac: Is it fair to say that we’ll be closer to $125 million or $150 million than to $65 million? Originally, I saw that it was $250 million, and the estimates are talking about $65 million.
Ms. Paré: It’s still $248 million in total. You understand that, sometimes, the years don’t always align with the needs. The established amount is still $248 million. That is the budget we are working with.
Senator Gignac: I’m changing the subject completely. It was an announcement that surprised quite a few Canadians when the Prime Minister signed a memorandum of understanding with China regarding public safety. I’ll be very transparent: I am co‑chair of the Canada-China Legislative Association. I never would have imagined seeing such collaboration a year ago. Can you explain the details of the memorandum of understanding on public safety between Canada and China? You could also send us the details in writing.
[English]
Mr. Larkin: The MOU is actually a re-enhancement of one that was signed in 2010. From time to time, memorandums of understanding with many different law enforcement agencies are reviewed, modified and updated to modernized language.
I cannot speak to the specifics of what is in the MOU based on, obviously, an agreement with our partner in that particular case, Chinese law enforcement, that we would not disclose anything in the agreement without their permission and, mutually, they would do the same.
What I can tell you to ease concern is that these are very standard. We have MOUs with the FBI, the DEA, the CIA and with other police agencies in Canada, and it is really around how we share information. It is how we actually disclose information. It is how we actually do mutual investigations if we’re requesting information but also around the costs of investigations. There are times where we may be requested for information where there is a financial implication, and there is a cost-sharing mechanism and a cost-recovery mechanism.
It is also generally in the spirit of cooperation, the spirit of ensuring public safety not only in our country but also across. There are some specific pieces. Obviously, one of our interests is around precursors, fentanyl, the challenges of illicit drugs in society and how we work collaboratively to ensure the safety of Canadians.
So, again, this one was reviewed. The first MOU was in 2010. I believe it was reviewed in 2014 and 2018 and then, most recently, by representatives of the Government of Canada in China.
[Translation]
Senator Dalphond: Thank you to everyone who has joined us this morning. My first question is for you, Mr. Larkin. You mentioned earlier in your speech that in the budget, the RCMP provides services to 600 Indigenous communities across Canada. I assume this is included in the $5.2 billion budget for contributions. You receive $2.4 billion in contributions from the provinces. I assume that Indigenous communities do not contribute to policing services and that this is a federal responsibility. So this is money paid directly to you by the federal government. What portion of the budget goes to policing services in Indigenous communities?
Mr. Larkin: Thank you for the question. I will begin by answering it, and then I will turn the floor over to Ms. Hazen.
[English]
Again, this is part of our Indigenous-provincial-territorial-municipal policing agreement with provinces and territories, as well as some individual municipalities and, of course, as you alluded to, 600 Indigenous communities. There is a portion of funding from Public Safety through the First Nations and Inuit Policing Program, the FNIPP program, and, of course, there are various pieces. In some provinces and territories, more than 70% of the costs are provided by provinces and/or territories. In other municipalities, it could be up to 90%, and then the federal contribution is either 30% or 10%. So a large portion of the monies and services that we provide have been recovered.
Ms. Hazen, you may want to add some specifics around the actual numbers and numerical numbers.
Ms. Hazen: Thank you very much for the question.
Within the Main Estimates, you can see all of the money that we plan to spend on a gross basis to support our Indigenous, provincial, territorial and municipal policing.
If you look under Main Estimates by purpose, under “Operating,” you will see that number is $5.2 billion. If you move across along the columns, you will see that there is an offset under the “Revenue and Other Reductions” column of about $2.4 billion. About 99% of that $2.4 billion represents funding that we have received from some of our partners — so either a province or a municipality or a territory — that we use to offset the total net estimated authorities that we require of just over $3 billion to support that line of our service.
Senator Dalphond: I suspect Indigenous communities are not contributing. They receive the police service, but they don’t have to pay for it because that’s money that will be coming from the federal government through CIRNAC. What is the cost of providing services to the 600 communities to which you provide services?
Ms. Hazen: A mixed model is used for those types of services. We collect some funding from our Indigenous partners, while other funding is provided directly through the Public Safety Canada itself. I would be happy to provide you with a breakdown of the $2.4 billion in regard to what the source is, including our Indigenous partners.
Senator Dalphond: Thank you. And, yes, please provide that because my next questions are about Public Safety Canada. I see that, on this, you have a program of $390 million for payments to the provinces and Indigenous band communities, and there is funding for the First Nations and Inuit Policing Program at $85 million. There is also the Aboriginal Community Safety Development Contribution Program at $18 million.
Does the money go to the RCMP through you, or do they receive contributions directly from the Crown? Sometimes, it is difficult to follow the money, so what is the real amount?
Ms. Paré: That is a very good question. Thank you. I will ask my colleague Adrian Walraven, who is the expert on that. He can answer your questions.
Senator Dalphond: Or maybe it comes from Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.
[Translation]
Adrian Walraven, Director General, Indigenous Affairs, Public Safety Canada: To return to your important question, I would like to confirm that a certain portion of the funding comes from the RCMP budget. In addition to that amount, every year, funds are transferred from Public Safety Canada to increase the number of officers in Indigenous communities through the PSPPNI.
This varies each year. Last year, I believe the transfer amount was $76 million. It’s always between $70 and $80 million per year.
If I understand your question correctly, for the 36 Indigenous police services across the country, the costs are directly funded by the provinces and Public Safety Canada. The federal government covers 52% of the costs and the provincial governments cover 48%. There is no specific budget allocation for this aspect of the PSPPNI. My team is currently finalizing the last fiscal year’s figures.
However, I estimate that this year, we are approaching $200 million annually for the operations of these police services. In addition to that, the vast majority of the infrastructure program, the FNIPFP, targets the needs of these services. When we increase the number of officers in these police forces, we must also balance their infrastructure base. Since the 2024 budget, we have been doing both at the same time with these new investments.
Senator Dalphond: I understand perfectly. If we expand the police station, part of the funding goes to another program, which is the capitalization program.
Could you send us details and figures so we know how much money goes directly to the RCMP and how much the RCMP allocates directly to Indigenous services, so we can get a sense of what it costs to provide public safety on reserves?
[English]
Senator MacAdam: My question is for Mr. Tessier.
You mentioned a national strategy for employing veterans in your opening remarks. I wonder if you can elaborate on that. Also, as far as employers go, who are the major employers who would employ veterans?
Mr. Tessier: Thank you for the question.
The National Veterans Employment Strategy is designed to improve the opportunities for veterans in Canada. The goal is to provide tools and resources needed to help veterans with meaningful work after their release from the Canadian Armed Forces, leveraging the skills they attained while they were in service. I will talk more about things that have happened since 2022 from the strategy and as it evolved. I might ask Ms. Harrison, again, to add to this, because she is the expert in this area.
As a result of the strategy, we are connecting veterans with employers. Just to give you a sense of how big the strategy and the momentum are, since 2022, over 7,000 registrations of veterans with over 400 employer presentations were delivered through webinars and digital career fairs. That is over 6,000 members in the Hire a Veteran LinkedIn group and over 600 employer representatives actively posting job opportunities.
The strategy is set up such that there are different pieces to the strategy. First, when veterans are transitioning, there are career webinars and sessions that enable veterans to, one, have presentations from the industry to understand what types of job offers are in the industry and what employment is available. Also, we have tools to maintain that momentum, whether through LinkedIn or certain sites where employers can come in and post jobs where they are specifically looking for veterans and where veterans can search. There is significant momentum in that piece.
Senator MacAdam: What kinds of success are you having with that initiative?
Mr. Tessier: To give you some idea of the successes or outcomes — first, not every veteran who is releasing is looking for a job, necessarily. Sometimes, they will take a year or two to recalibrate, transition and maybe move back to where they came from when they originally entered the Canadian Armed Forces or to a different location for family reasons.
To give you an idea, we have had annual events since 2022 with over 7,000 participants, but we have also facilitated over 400 interviews that we know of that are real after those connections. We know those numbers are higher as a result of organic discussions. When folks hear about an employer, they get the contact and follow up afterward or they have other discussions.
I will turn to Ms. Harrison in a moment, but just to give a personal example, veterans talk to folks within Veterans Affairs Canada all the time. We also know employers, so we sometimes connect them, as well. That happens organically. I have been in those circumstances myself — where veterans reach out.
Ms. Harrison, do you have anything to add to expand on that?
Ms. Harrison: Yes, thank you.
Some key partnerships that we have built with stakeholders include Helmets to Hardhats Canada, the True Patriot Love Foundation, the Treble Victor Group, Coding for Veterans and the Soldiers in Tech program.
Just to build upon what Mr. Tessier mentioned, since we launched our employment strategy, we have seen 7,100 registrations with over 400 employer presentations delivered through our career webinars and digital career fairs. Approximately 6,600 members in the Hire a Veteran LinkedIn group have connected with over 600 employer representatives in that time, as well.
Senator MacAdam: Thank you, but I’m still interested in some statistics on actual hiring. If you don’t have those available today, maybe you could provide those to the committee.
Ms. Harrison: We can absolutely provide that in writing, yes.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you for being here. I have two questions: one for Mr. Larkin and one for Mr. Tessier.
I think I have asked this here before, but when we look at the report, Mr. Larkin — the departmental plan that was shared for 2026-27 — and this is under the whole area of recruitment, hiring and finding future staff — it looks like between 2025 and 2028 you are looking to increase recruiting by 500 — trying to get 500 more police officers and working through a shortage, as are border control and the CAF; everybody has this challenge.
You are looking to increase, but there is presently a shortage of 3,400 officers. I’m trying to figure out how the strategy is for recruitment, including the training of the cadets, is also included and recommended by the Auditor General. I know there is a really interesting model in B.C. and the Yukon, where there is a quicker process of 140 days. Across the country, what are the kinds of things you are looking at?
Mr. Larkin: Thank you.
Recruiting for the RCMP is not a challenge. We have a lot of young Canadians who wish to join the noble profession, but our challenge is processing. The challenge is the bureaucracy and mechanics of our system and moving the candidate from the start to the finish, particularly while ensuring we represent the diversity of our country. This has been an organizational priority for three years for Commissioner Duheme, albeit with some frustration because, year over year, we are essentially at a neutral variance when you factor in the folks we recruit and attrition through retirement and leaving the organization.
What has spurred a lot of discussion internally is investment in RCMP 1,000, which is solely dedicated to federal policing, so we are looking at different streams to bring people into the organization, the federal policing mandate and, obviously, Depot, which is the sole provider right now of cadet training. There are a number of positives that have occurred here. One is the Government of Canada has increased the cadet recruit allowance to $1,000 a week, which will help with skills and finding the right individuals. It will also help those candidates who come into the organization at a different stage of their career. This may be their second location. They may have a family, and leaving their family to attend the Depot is always a challenge when you make $525 a week, so to sustain that viability, we believe the candidates we attract will be much more representative of our country.
The commissioner has completely overhauled our recruitment system. We have a new leadership team and structure. We have added an assistant commissioner, Adam Palmer, the retired police chief of Vancouver, to run a pilot project in British Columbia. We are currently in the range of about 446 days to get a recruit into our organization from start to finish to get them to Depot. It is not acceptable. It will not meet the demands of attrition.
The project in British Columbia — Project Red Surge — is tied around the six-month mark. We are seeing tremendous success in British Columbia, and Yukon is tied to that project. The commissioner has just approved the replication of that in Alberta. Obviously, British Columbia and Alberta are two main provincial police services where we provide services to those provinces. The likelihood is we will move through.
On the federal policing mandate side, we have been looking at different streams of entry. Every year, we receive about 150 experienced police officers from other police organizations that want to join our organization. They are looking for career transitions or different pieces. We intend to increase and augment that number, but we have a different stream. Right now, those 150 would go to Depot for a modified project.
For example, young police officer recruits out of Nicolet in the province of Quebec have a significant training program. Our process would then have them go to Depot for six months. However, given that they have just done a significant portion of their education and training at Nicolet, we’ll move that to a 10‑week entry program. So we have a strategic approach.
This year, for example, in federal policing, our goal is to hire 350 regular members for the federal mandate, which would allow us to increase our troop gate at Depot. We can manage about 1,600 candidates a year out of Depot, but we are looking at different opportunities. So we have a specific training centre where experienced police offices will go through a specific stream. We also have the Canadian Police College in Ottawa that serves all national policing, but we’ll look at some specialized training for different streams into federal policing.
There are a number of vocations in national policing and federal policing where you don’t necessarily need to be a fully fledged police officer, but you can be a peace officer and have certain skill sets. Our goal is to actually increase the mandate through there. We anticipate that it will take us 24 months, at minimum, to get out of the attrition deficit we are in through different streams and different threads. But I want to assure in committee that the commissioner’s number one priority is to meet those vacancy rates.
It’s also tied to another question that another senator had about wellness, members injured on duty and off-duty illnesses. We are harming the individuals working consistently because we are asking them to do more. If we don’t make this a priority, quite frankly, the financial sustainability impact of benefits and our wellness programs will only increase, so it is a resilient strategy.
Senator M. Deacon: Thank you.
Senator Pupatello: Great follow-on from my question to the deputy commissioner and, perhaps, to Ms. Harrison. That’s about the benefit expenditures that are increasing year over year in the statutory programming for the RCMP.
I would like a breakdown of how many officers in total we have, how many officers we have currently on sick leave and how that number has changed year over year. May I please get a breakdown of the individual benefits that are being sought and how that has changed over time? For example, if it is medication, which medications are going up and by how much? All of these things are a bellwether over what some of the issues are with the RCMP on duty.
I think that gives you an idea of the kinds of wellness programs you have to do in advance to prevent this. If you don’t have all of that data, perhaps you could provide it to the committee after the meeting, but you may have a general sense. That 20% increase that we’re seeing in just the statutory benefit program is enormous, and if that continues, it will not matter how many people you recruit. It will not matter if you keep losing so many members to sick leave.
Mr. Larkin: Thank you very much. I will speak generally. We employ just under 20,000 regular members, so about 19,000 police officers are serving our country in all the three main mandates. We employ approximately 12,000 public servants and civilian members that provide overall support. So we’re in the range of anywhere, from year to year, of 30,000 to 33,000 overall employees serving our national police services. We will give you more breakdowns, and we can do it by province and mandate. There is lots of data we can provide you in writing. Ms. Hazen, you may have some details of officers who are off‑duty sick, or ODS. It does vary from province to province and program to program, which is important because you have to look at some of the uniqueness around those programs. For example, in national child exploitation, we see a high vacancy rate, obviously, because of the traumatic impacts and the effects of that. It varies from program to program.
Ms. Hazen, if you have some high-level data, go ahead. If not, we can provide that in writing.
Ms. Hazen: Thank you very much for the question. I don’t have the data with me in regard to the number of officers who are off-duty sick. I also don’t have specifics around the number of members who are receiving disability benefits. I know that number is upwards of 50% of our active forces who are receiving that benefit. We do acknowledge that the long-term sustainability of this benefit program is one that really needs to be assessed due to the rising costs associated with it. Our ability to manage these services —
Senator Pupatello: Did you say 50% of the active force? I don’t understand that figure.
Ms. Hazen: The benefits paid to members are available to active members, as well as members who are retired from the RCMP, so you can be —
Senator Pupatello: So that means any level of benefit?
Ms. Hazen: Yes, correct. So there are different benefits in addition to the monthly pension benefit I mentioned earlier. There are also benefits in regard to health and medication and access to health and benefits such as that, which some members require in order to enable them to undertake their duties.
But our ability to manage service-related disabilities is a challenge for us due to the lack of information sharing. As I mentioned earlier, Veterans Affairs Canada is the one who administers these benefits, and they adjudicate the applications, as well as make the payments. RCMP does not have the explicit authority to receive the personal information of those members who are receiving the benefits, so it does limit our ability to be able to provide accommodations to those members who are actively serving and providing policing services to Canadians. This is something we have been actively working on, trying to advocate, to have more access to information sharing. We hope, with that, we will be able to make some changes to the program.
Senator Pupatello: For example, you couldn’t tell me if, all of a sudden, there is a huge spike in antidepressant medication, for example, because you don’t have access to the information.
Ms. Hazen: There is some reporting that is done at a relatively high level between the RCMP and Veterans Affairs Canada. As an example, I have seen the top 10 ailments. But the granular information in regard to our members and how we can better accommodate them is not provided to the RCMP.
Senator Pupatello: Deputy commissioner, is that something that you are going to work on because I cannot imagine you could be a leader in the absence of key information about your membership?
Mr. Larkin: We have been actively working on that from a policy perspective. There are a number of legislative impediments we have been working on as well as working with our colleagues from Veterans Affairs Canada. I know that we have provided policy recommendations through Public Safety Canada to our minister, and equally we have been in conversation with Veterans Affairs Canada.
I think what Ms. Hazen is alluding to is the information that we are seeking is, quite frankly, the ability to better accommodate a serving member. So somebody may have an ailment, but we are actually deploying and/or putting that individual in precarious positions where their ailment will never get better and, in fact, might worsen. It is really around how we share the information.
Of course, we always want these things to expedite and go faster. There are a number of pieces that we need to work on. What I can assure this committee is that we are in active, ongoing dialogue with Veterans Affairs Canada from a policy perspective as to how we do that. There is also some collective bargaining on the regular members’ side and some collective bargaining impediments that we have, and we are currently in a statutory freeze because we are in collective bargaining with the National Police Federation.
So there are a few pieces that hold and move some of these things. They are somewhat bureaucratic, but, as Ms. Hazen alluded to, our intent is to resolve that so we can better adjudicate and better serve our members and better protect them for longer-term wellness.
Senator Pupatello: Could you submit the responses in writing?
Mr. Larkin: Yes.
Senator Pupatello: Could you also add what the union information is? Would they be better able than you to access the level of detail, that they would know what is happening with their members as well?
[Translation]
The Chair: I have a question for Public Safety Canada. Regarding contributions to the provinces as financial assistance in the event of natural disasters, you have allocated $1,106,000,000 in the budget. Last year, in 2024–25, you had budgeted $616 million, and actual expenditures were $343 million.
What leads you to anticipate such a catastrophic increase in natural disasters?
Ms. Paré: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.
For this program, we are working with the provinces. The amount you see in this year’s Main Estimates is $1 billion for 2024-25 that has been moved to 2026-27, which was $1 billion, for events that took place in the past. The provinces must compile all costs associated with each event.
The Chair: So, based on discussions with the provinces, do you anticipate the amounts that should be paid in 2026–27?
Ms. Paré: That’s right. This is for events that have already taken place, such as the wildfires in British Columbia. So, we’ve done our job: We’ve reviewed the expenses, ensured they’re eligible, and payments are scheduled for this year.
The Chair: Thank you. You also have $3,266,000 in a cybersecurity cooperation program; that doesn’t seem like much to me. Is this just a contribution to a larger program? I understand that it’s only $3 million and you haven’t paid much attention to it.
Ms. Paré: I’m sorry . . . . I can get back to you with the answer, unless I have a colleague here who can answer that question. Yes. My colleague Maryse will be able to do so.
Maryse Plamondon, Acting Director of Programs, Public Safety Canada: Thank you for the question. This is not necessarily part of a larger program. In fact, the amounts involved are rather limited.
The last call for proposals took place in September 2025; there was a lot of interest, and we received 590 applications. As you pointed out, the amount of $3 million per year was not enough to support these projects. We currently have about twenty projects under way for the next three years.
The Chair: Are these projects that departments are implementing to secure their systems?
Ms. Plamondon: Indeed; this is a call for proposals that is open across the country. Sometimes, universities or companies may submit projects to improve their security.
The Chair: Can you remind us of the number of complete applications you have received?
Ms. Plamondon: We received 590 requests.
The Chair: How many have you accepted?
Ms. Plamondon: About twenty.
The Chair: So, there are more than 500 who believe they are at risk in terms of cybersecurity and who are not funded — at least, not by you.
Ms. Plamondon: Actually, do they think they are at risk of cybersecurity threats? They believe instead that they have the means to improve the existing systems —
The Chair: They see that there are problems. We won’t blame Mythos for this, because it will find others.
Ms. Plamondon: These are proposals aimed at improving the systems.
The Chair: Thank you. My next question is for Mr. Larkin of the RCMP.
You spoke about the challenges and risks to national security related to terrorism. You have had discussions with police chiefs, particularly in Toronto, where the risks are quite high.
In Global Affairs Canada’s budget, there was a program concerning foreign intelligence outside the country aimed at preventing terrorism. This program has been scaled back. I was surprised, given that risks are increasing, that we would cut a program focused on intelligence and collaboration regarding counterterrorism abroad. Do you have any funding increases or measures in place to cover foreign intelligence efforts to prevent terrorism abroad?
Mr. Larkin: Thank you for the question.
[English]
You will see, as part of our investment in the RCMP 1,000, a significant — I think there are 20 additional resources that are tied to international policing. So I want to talk a little bit globally. We continue to be in a significant number of countries. Commissioner Duheme has asked for a review of our International Policing Program to ensure that we have people in the right locations at the right time. So we may go to a location or a country at the time because the issue is significant. We resolve or geopolitics change, and it’s around how we reshuffle.
The cost per deployment, for example, an average cost to deploy somebody internationally is about $500,000 a year. It is a significant expenditure. We want to ensure that those individuals we have deployed across the world are well attuned.
The reality is we are very much focused on Five Eyes countries, although we have seen an increase in Indo-Pacific deployment. We have also seen an increase in deployment in the Caribbean, and, of course, in the United States, we are seeing an enhancement and increase.
I want to go back to, as part of that investment in 2026-27 and beyond, our Integrated National Security Enforcement Teams, or INSET, across the country in every major city will see a significant additional increase in their resources. For example, in Ontario, yes, the Toronto Police Service launched a new initiative, which is tied to our INSET team. We were able to then add some additional resources to their team to ensure enhanced intelligence-sharing information.
I want to recognize that every INSET team across the country also has embedded members from other policing jurisdictions. For example, in Montreal, Service de police de la Ville de Montréal has people integrated in that team. Toronto is integrated; Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver. So the share and flow of information are significant.
We envision that the international deployment number will increase, but before we do that, we want to make sure that our deployment is wise and efficient but also brings the maximum benefit of that partnership. That’s why you have seen that shifting. But as part of this over the next three years, you will see that program increase by 20 resources globally, which ties into our national program.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Cardozo: I have two questions. I want to ask one more question on the issue we were talking about in terms of anti-Semitism. Since October 2023, there has been a massive increase of anti-Semitism, whether it is in Australia, the United Kingdom or the United States. Are you talking to your global counterparts? I say that in the context of the estimates, because when we had an incident a couple of weeks ago in Toronto, the Cabinet announced $10 million. But we have to be doing something more or something different.
Are you speaking to other people in other parts of the world who are experiencing the same problem?
Mr. Larkin: Through you, Mr. Chair, in short, yes. Clearly, the Five Eyes partnership is something significant. There are a series of committees on the Five Eyes. There is national security, there is a financial piece and other pieces, but there are the principals that meet.
Upcoming in June, the commissioner will meet with all of the counterparts from Five Eyes countries to share information, share intelligence and share best practices, promising practices, patterns and trends. Every single day, through our international policing footprint, in short, yes.
When there is an incident, for example, we do have an international peacekeeping mission in Palestine, and so, obviously, we have members there deployed in partnership with the Canadian Armed Forces doing some police training. The world, although it is large globally, is a small world of information, and I want to assure you that every single day, our national security folks and our international policing folks are talking to our counterparts in countries across the world, sharing information and sharing intelligence, but we are also looking at promising practices, and we are also looking domestically, as I alluded to.
We bring together police leaders from all major urban areas every two weeks to look at that and the connections and what’s happening. It is a fairly significant, robust system. Of course, Public Safety Canada also has a policy mechanism that, perhaps, my colleague Ms. Paré can allude to.
It is a very stitched-up security and investigation world, and we should be proud of that as a democracy. We should be proud of that as an organization. As a country, I believe that we are heavily invested and heavily involved in those national and international operations in intelligence sharing.
Ms. Paré: Just to come back to the Canada Community Security Program, the way the program works is that we fund security upgrades for communities at risk. We work with them, so we support a safer, more resilient gathering space for them. We build awareness and capacity to prevent and respond to hate incidents. That’s the type of project we fund through the program we have discussed a bit earlier.
There is the data we get in terms of the landscape, but then there is the work we do with communities to make sure that they have the tools for protection and that we can help fund those elements.
Senator Cardozo: What’s the status of your plans with regard to contract policing with provinces? Alberta has been off and on, and I think Surrey in B.C. — where do things stand? Do you anticipate changes?
Mr. Larkin: I will turn to Ms. Paré, since Public Safety Canada manages the contracting pieces.
From the RCMP’s perspective, we have three clear mandates: One is to provide support to provinces, municipalities and territories that request contracted services for the RCMP. We remain committed to that. We have the Federal Policing Mandate, and, of course, we have the National Specialized Services policing mandate.
In November 2026, the RCMP will have been completely transitioned to the new police service of Surrey. We have an ongoing working relationship and a transition plan. We will still continue to provide some high-level provincial services.
We anticipate Grande Prairie is also on track for transitioning to its own service effective November 2026. It appears to be on track. We are just working through it. They have asked for some ongoing contractual support of specialized services, emergency response, forensics and some key provincial initiatives.
Conversely, though, in Nova Scotia, we are actually transitioning some small agencies, who are ending their own municipal police services, and have asked the provincial police, through the Nova Scotia RCMP, to take that on.
Ms. Paré can provide further information on 2032. The current contract is complete in 2032, and, obviously, we are working with Public Safety Canada beyond that.
Ms. Paré: Thank you. I will ask my colleague Craig Oldham to speak about the contract policing and the renegotiation.
Craig Oldham, Director General, Crime Prevention Branch, Public Safety Canada: Thank you very much. I will be short, through you, Mr. Chair.
As the Senior Deputy Commissioner has alluded to, the contract policing agreements run out in 2032. The minister has been quite clear about meeting provinces where they are at. If there is a desire to continue contract policing, we will be in that space. How we deliver that contract policing will be the point of negotiation: How do we do it efficiently, effectively and in a way that allows it to support both specialized policing, federal policing and the contract policing elements?
Senator Pate: Thank you very much. I have questions for Mr. Larkin and Mr. Fiore. I will ask them both, and if you want to respond in writing because I know our time is short, that’s great.
Mr. Larkin, for the better part of the last decade, we have been in conversations — a number of us — about the need for a centralized database. Certainly, it has come up, again, in the recent issues around using the Canadian Police Information Centre system, or CPIC system — or not — or developing something new. I would be interested in any updates on where things are in terms of that kind of centralized database that would meet the needs of provinces, territories as well as, obviously, the federal government. That’s my question for you.
Mr. Fiore, decades of research coming out of Public Safety Canada have indicated that the most effective way to address public safety when it comes to prisoners is to ensure successful community integration. Linked to that is the need for human rights-based and evidence-based programming.
I note in the Departmental Plan that there has been an increase in allocation for class-action settlement amounts, which means that there is a recognition that rights have been violated and that there will be financial accountability requirements. I also indicate that there have been a number of job cuts to those providing programs and services.
Given all the research, I would be interested in the committee receiving the business case and the financial rationale for the types of cuts that are being made at this time.
If both of those could be available, that would be great.
Mr. Larkin: Mr. Chair, I will start first. Thank you for the question.
The RCMP has stewardship for a series of databases on behalf of all police services in the country. I’ll very briefly go through a couple of key ones.
We just launched a new Canadian Criminal Intelligence Information System, which is providing support to all criminal intelligence services across the country. That was a $40 million investment to support the criminal intelligence service operations of all the provinces and territories. There were some tremendous successes on that particular piece. The National DNA Data Bank has longevity and is working exceptionally well.
We have been increasing our capacity in another area, the Canadian Integrated Ballistics Identification Network, so we can trace ballistics across the country and into the United States and Canada. The RCMP has stewardship, but we have been expanding and connecting that with various police services, including Vancouver, Toronto and, of course, Montreal. We’re also connected to the province of Ontario and the province of Quebec.
The key system, which is used more than 350,000 times a day, is the Canadian Police Information Centre system, commonly known as CPIC. It just celebrated a 50-year birthday, and although the technology is consistent, dependable and reliable, there is a modernization piece around where we can also integrate, for example, the Canadian identification and fingerprint system, et cetera.
We have launched a CPIC modernization lead in the organization. In this current Main Estimates, there is no money for that program. However, I anticipate, as we look to 2027 and beyond, we will be seeking funds and financial investments around a national restructuring. We do have a phased plan because it is such a large, integral system. We can’t shut the system off one day and start fresh with a new system, so we are taking a phased approach.
There are a series of internal meetings about the CPIC modernization plan. We are consulting with police services of jurisdiction and provincial policing as to their needs, their wants and what they envision in the future. That will also entail community consultation as to what that looks like around information sharing.
There are different categories of services that have an ability to access CPIC systems, so stay tuned on that. There’s lots of good work happening.
I anticipate, though, this is likely a five- to ten-year project of renewal. It is a significant overhaul. We’re watching our American colleagues. The FBI is going through a similar process. We’re on that committee. We’re watching the work that they are doing and how they are phasing it in as well.
[Translation]
The Chair: Will you respond in writing?
Mr. Larkin: Yes, senator.
The Chair: Thank you.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: My question is for Mr. Tessier.
I notice in the Departmental Plan 2026-27, the number of full-time equivalent employees is going to decrease by 21.3%, or roughly 800 full-time equivalents. What does the department intend to do in terms of its current activities given that there is this significant decrease in employees?
Mr. Tessier: Can I clarify the question? The decrease in employees is 2027-28, this fiscal year to the following one?
Senator MacAdam: What is stated in your 2026-27 plan is that there is going to be a decrease in the full-time equivalents.
Mr. Tessier: Okay.
Senator MacAdam: Is that correct?
Mr. Tessier: I can give you the appreciation I have.
Senator MacAdam: Sure.
Mr. Tessier: Maybe Mr. Adams can provide any clarifications.
But to my knowledge, in the piece, there are no reductions in moving from last year to this year, other than some temporary funds that were ending in Budget 2023. Some of those have come to an end.
However, we have received, through Budget 2025, the funding that I have talked about in the opening statements and $40.1 million ongoing. That funding is to stabilize the temporary funding that we have had for the last six years on the service delivery side.
I will ask Mr. Adams to see if there is anything else that he would add to ensure that I have that correct.
Jonathan Adams, Director General, Finance Veterans Affairs Canada: Further to Mr. Tessier’s point, the key aspect is with the Departmental Plan is that it is a snapshot in time. When that was developed, as highlighted in the question, it was based on temporary funding and resources that were scheduled to end at the end of March.
However, as we know, through Budget 2025, there was the announcement of $184.9 million; that is the extension of those temporary resources into permanent funding. We’re able to keep those staff in place. It is approximately 500 resources. Once we have the final approval of the Treasury Board submission and implement it, that will then be updated from a funding perspective as well as a resource and FTE perspective.
Senator MacAdam: Thank you. Another question. Can you provide me an update on when the renovations will be complete for the head office in Charlottetown?
Mr. Tessier: The current Daniel J. MacDonald Building in Charlottetown, we are working very closely with our colleagues at PSPC who are delivering the project. Currently, that completion is projected for the fall, with some transition from various sites in Charlottetown, working on IT equipment, furniture and those types of things in the fall, with the planned move in January 2027.
Senator MacAdam: Thank you.
Mr. Tessier: Thank you so much.
Senator Galvez: My question is for Commissioner Larkin. I just came back from Alaska, where we had the opportunity to meet at the military base with the army, the navy and the National Guard.
Natural disasters are front, back and centre of the police and military because of the number of calls there are for floods, forest fires and the security of homes and properties.
Do you intervene as much as what I heard is done in the United States with respect to natural disasters, and is there a budget that you allocate to this specifically?
Mr. Larkin: The RCMP’s response, for example, in Yukon as a territorial police service, would be to provide support to the territory around emergency management measures.
We would have a person assigned to the emergency operations centre. Our role is very much in a critical incident management perspective. But then, on the ground, our members are heavily involved in evacuation, ensuring the safety of citizens and businesses that may be vacated through evacuation.
Our role around natural disasters is very much reactive. We will control traffic access points. We will provide support to emergency services. We will provide equipment and air assets. Particularly in the North, we will move air assets, whether it be helicopters or fixed-wing assets that are able to provide and move resources, et cetera. But we are very much more responsive.
The budget for our organization is built into, for example, the territorial or provincial budget because it is a provincial responsibility. So the work we receive and the money we receive are very much based around the province and territory.
But we are a reactive response in the emergency management cycle: evacuation, notification, critical incident management. We may lead an evacuation. We may have a senior leader involved in the real-time operation centre, the emergency disaster centre, et cetera.
We are not actively involved in emergency planning or those types of things in provinces and territories.
Senator Galvez: Are you developing any artificial intelligence programs for preparing and to make this participation more agile? I know you are saying it is reactive.
Mr. Larkin: What we would generally do is we would amplify information from Public Safety Canada. Public Safety Canada has that as a part of their mandate. We would amplify it in a province and a territory. We would use their programming. We would use their processes. That’s generally our role provincially and territorially.
Nationally, if there was something significant — for example, as we head into some significant flooding that is occurring right now in different parts of the country, including as we head into the wildfire season — we will nationally work with Public Safety Canada on providing information, strategic and policy advice through Public Safety Canada, to our minister and to the Minister of Emergency Management. We will be involved in those discussions.
We do have a real-time operations centre in Ottawa that will look at RCMP resources across the nation because, from time to time, we will move resources proactively to support other provinces and territories.
Senator Galvez: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Dalphond: My question is for Correctional Service Canada.
In the recent cutbacks you have implemented, you eliminated the positions of library technicians and the post-secondary training provided by Cégep Marie-Victorin, both in Cowansville for men and in Joliette for women. These two decisions have been widely criticized, particularly the second one.
Can I hope that Correctional Service Canada will consider digging into its reserves or using a supplementary budget to convince Treasury Board that this is an investment of a few thousand dollars that will save millions of dollars down the line? If someone completes their training, they will have a better chance of finding a job upon release from prison. I believe it’s a good investment if we give them the chance to finish high school or earn a college diploma. May I ask you to put pressure on Treasury Board and reconsider the matter? In principle, all of this will end on June 30, so that gives us a little time to work on it.
[English]
Mr. Pyke: I will start with CEGEP. In terms of the CEGEP, CSC does not have dedicated funding for post-secondary education. Historically, the only exception was the contract that you mentioned with a CEGEP in Quebec.
This current contract will and does remain in place over the course of the summer semester, and, as you indicated, it applied to two institutions, Cowansville and Joliette, where instruction and courses were given in person.
We are having ongoing discussions with that CEGEP in relation to a proposed new model that may be more efficient across the entirety of Quebec in terms of that delivery.
We will continue to focus, of course, core efforts on secondary education that is so critical. That’s our focus per se; we do have ongoing discussions in that regard.
In terms of librarians, as part of our efforts to increase our online resources and modernize corrections in terms of offender digital education and offender digital strategy, they have access to more digital learning opportunities than they have in the past. Many of our sites are operating without librarians at present, and they are using dedicated resources through social program officers and other means in terms of maintaining an open library setting — still have access to books, still have access to certain elements of controlled — not the internet, obviously, but intranet-driven access — for court documents and reviews.
We will continue to investigate partnerships in that sense.
To answer your question, the impacts of the proposal are currently undergoing a more in-depth analysis with CSC in order to determine our appropriate next steps. As you might be aware, we have a new commissioner. We certainly continue to hear from a wide range of stakeholders in relation to their feedback, and we will be taking that into consideration before we move forward.
Senator Dalphond: An investment in education is always a good investment.
Senator Pate: I have a supplementary on that regarding the data that Senator Dalphond requested. Up until 1992, post‑secondary education was funded within the Correctional Service Canada. Perhaps you could include the success rates and the links to rehabilitation of those pre-1992 data, as well. Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chair: I have a question for the RCMP.
Do you have sufficient resources to adapt to new trends in drug trafficking?
Let me give you an example. We saw the other day, during a seizure, that drugs were coming in from Mexico by train, hidden inside Mexican-made cars. They’re entering the country by train. You know, I’m a fan of drones and I’m interested in that aspect. So, yes, they can come in by air, but they can also come in underwater.
What’s stopping the mafia from using underwater drones that can go 6,000 metres deep and have battery life of 8, 10, or 12 hours? It’s obvious that if they aren’t already doing it, they will soon — I don’t want to give them the idea, but I think they’re faster than I am.
However, do you have everything you need to adapt? You change all the detection technology and inspection components in a situation; you take resources and put them elsewhere.
We have a little time, so if you could tell us more about how you handle these situations . . . . Do you need additional resources?
Mr. Larkin: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.
Let’s just say that we are very proud of our police service, but things are changing, and they are changing fast. Technology is changing faster than the RCMP and the Government of Canada.
What is very important to us are partnerships — partnerships with municipal and provincial police forces, and now with international police forces.
I’m going to say a few things.
[English]
There are a few items. In the last fiscal year, we received an infusion of money around border integrity. That allowed us to actually take a different approach around our border. We have a vast border, and a large part of it does not have patrols or different pieces.
We have been able to expand significant technology across the country. We are able to work on a few pilot projects with our colleagues in the United States, with Homeland Security and their border agency, around sharing real-time information. We have increased our air assets for increased patrols, looking at different patterns of migration and people who are moving illicit drugs into our country. We have renewed a strategy around port policing. So, we have to recognize a significant amount around our ports, which includes strong partnerships with the Canada Border Services Agency — integrated teams — the work we’re doing.
As we see the economic investments in ports, for example, in Contrecœur in Quebec, Churchill in Manitoba and in Prince Rupert, we are going to see significantly more access to our country through increased port activity and containers. We continue to work with our railway partners — and I won’t speak for them — but CBSA’s enhanced technology for looking at rail cars and some of those pieces — but also around the investment that we are receiving in this fiscal year. A portion of the 350 regular members that we will hire this year will be allocated and dedicated to border integrity and serious organized crime.
But we have to change our approach, globally. The mandate of the Coast Guard is changing. With the movement under the Canadian Armed Forces, they will have an increased mandate around patrolling and working. We work very closely with the Coast Guard now, but that mandate will be enhanced and even improved. We do joint patrols with the Coast Guard, but they will have opportunities to interdict and do different pieces, which are extremely important.
Then, in terms of our approach, one of the things we’re seeing in national security is a term that I use: poly-criminality. There used to be a time when I was a young police officer a long time ago that people who focused on auto theft and did auto theft, people who focused on drug trafficking, did drug trafficking and people who focused on terrorism, et cetera. That has all eroded. The economics, financing and diversification of crime and those who perpetrate it are poly-criminals: They do a little bit of business over here and a little bit of business over there. They have essentially taken a business model and applied it to crime.
Traditionally, in policing, including in the RCMP, we have still been focused on directorates and siloed approaches. Through federal policing transformation and reformation, we are changing that.
I will use an example and end on this note: Operation GIANT SLALOM, which is before the courts — the largest investigation in our history in partnership with the FBI — the arrest of Mr. Ryan Wedding, a former Canadian Olympian, is a significant piece. That could not have been done — it was in partnership with the United States, Mexico and other global police organizations. The strength and the origins of that investigation were through our deployments in other countries, working with other law enforcement agencies.
That’s very key in terms of where we have individuals, how we build relationships and how we share information. We recognize boundaries, but crime does not.
[Translation]
The Chair: Speaking of borders, in the ministerial plan, the following can be read in the “International Operations” section:
The results we expect to achieve
proactively identify and disrupt emerging threats, individuals, and organizations involved in criminal activities with a Nexus to Canada
Is there an issue with the use of NEXUS in relation to criminal activities?
Ms. Paré: Was that part of our departmental plan?
The Chair: I see it in the RCMP’s, if my information is correct.
Mr. Larkin: Could you please repeat your question, Mr. Chair?
The Chair: Would you like me to repeat it, or will you take note of it?
Mr. Larkin: Yes, we —
The Chair: In fact, in the ministerial plan, under “International Operations,” it states that the expected results are to:
proactively identify and disrupt emerging threats, individuals, and organizations involved in criminal activities with a Nexus to Canada
So, it’s as if issues with how NEXUS operates had been identified, or as if criminals were using it. In any case, that’s what we’re inferring.
Mr. Larkin: I will take note of the question and provide you with further information at a later time.
[English]
One of the key pieces — and you talked about this, Mr. Chair — is the agility to change. Policing was very much measured on arrests, the laying of charges and watching judicial processes occur.
One of the new operations is disruption. If we can disrupt a criminal organization, terrorism or foreign interference without the nexus of laying criminal charges and without seeing it through the judicial system, does that equate to success? That is a bit of a change of philosophy. There are times we may run projects and do work that we recognize will not necessarily lead to the arrest, detention or potentially the incarceration of somebody, but we will disrupt networks. So it may disrupt the flow of illicit drugs or guns. We may take that intelligence or information and use it for other investigations.
That is a large part of our discussion internally around a philosophical policy shift. Also, how do Canadian citizens expect their national and international police services to demonstrate action by arresting and seeing the judicial system work its democracy? That’s one of the great things about our country, but there is a philosophical shift around actual disruption. You will hear that word more often from the RCMP and other policing partners. If we can disrupt a network and prevent something like an act of violence, but it does not equate to criminal charges in our system, how do you measure that success?
[Translation]
The Chair: I had noticed this change in vocabulary. Thank you for clarifying it.
[English]
Senator Pupatello: I want to go back to the percentage of officers within the RCMP who are on sick leave at the moment. Do you have a percentage? I appreciate that detail is sitting in another ministry, perhaps, or in the implementation of the program of benefit, but you must know that number because you need to adjust scheduling, for example, when people are off. Clearly, you have to replace them. Can you give me an idea of what percentage of your workforce is on sick leave at the moment?
Mr. Larkin: I don’t have the actual data on a percentage basis with me.
Senator Pupatello: Do you have an idea?
Mr. Larkin: We will get it to you. I can tell you that our goal, as we deal with the recruiting and staffing challenges, is a national rate of 7%. That is our target, which is consistent with other police services. People get injured on duty. It is physical employment. We recognize that, and we are able to look at data, saying that we can expect, for example, in the Emergency Response Team or the canine unit that the handler may become injured on duty or in a collision. We can look at general aggregate data to predict that. Our goal is 7%, but I will get you the exact data, and we can certainly break it down by province, territory and business line.
Senator Pupatello: I would like to know as well if you are comparing the other jurisdictions in terms of the goal, if you knew that the other jurisdictions are seeing a 22.4% increase or anything like that because that is a whopping increase between 2024-25 and 2026-27. It must be alarming for you to know that figure. For you not to have that data today is a bit disturbing because it is so obvious that we would be focusing on this number. We have had three or four questions so far on just this topic, and we don’t have any data on those four questions today. So I’m a little concerned about not coming with the data to the committee as well.
Mr. Larkin: Thank you. It is duly noted.
[Translation]
The Chair: This concludes today’s session. Thank you to the witnesses for answering our questions so generously. We expect written commitments within a week, or seven to ten days. We will continue our study tomorrow, Wednesday, at 6:45 p.m.
(The committee adjourned.)