THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL FINANCE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, April 22, 2026
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance met this day at 6:47 p.m. [ET] to study the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2027, except for Library of Parliament Vote 1; and in camera to consider a draft agenda (future business).
Senator Claude Carignan (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: I would like to welcome all the senators and all the Canadians tuning in on sencanada.ca.
My name is Claude Carignan. I’m a senator from Quebec and the chair of the Senate Standing Committee on National Finance. I would now like to ask my colleagues to introduce themselves.
[English]
Senator Pupatello: Good evening. Sandra Pupatello from Ontario.
[Translation]
Senator Gignac: Good evening and welcome. Clément Gignac, from Quebec. Kennebec Division.
[English]
Senator Loffreda: Good evening. Welcome. I am Senator Tony Loffreda, Montreal, Quebec.
Senator Ross: Welcome. Krista Ross from New Brunswick.
Senator MacAdam: Jane MacAdam from Prince Edward Island.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Martine Hébert from Quebec.
The Chair: Honourable senators, today we’re continuing our study of the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2027.
For our first panel of witnesses today, we are pleased to welcome Ryan Pilgrim, Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer, and Aaron McCrorie, Vice-President, Intelligence and Enforcement Branch, of the Canada Border Services Agency.
We also welcome Annie Rémillard, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer, and Catherine Scott, Assistant Deputy Minister, Social Programs, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.
Welcome and thank you for accepting our invitation to appear today. We will now hear the opening statements from Mr. Pilgrim, followed by Ms. Rémillard.
[English]
Ryan Pilgrim, Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer, Canada Border Services Agency: Mr. Chair, honourable committee members, thank you for your important work and the opportunity to speak with you today. My name is Ryan Pilgrim. I am the Chief Financial Officer and Vice-President of Finance and Corporate Management at the Canada Border Services Agency.
I am here today to discuss the agency’s 2026-27 Main Estimates. I am joined at the table by my colleague Mr. Aaron McCrorie, Vice-President of the Intelligence and Enforcement Branch. I am also joined in the room by the following CBSA officials, who may come to the table to respond to questions that relate to their respective areas of expertise: Kelly Belanger, Associate Vice-President of Travellers Branch; Graeme Hamilton, Director General, Traveller, Commercial and Trade Policy; and Mike Leahy, Director General, Commercial Branch.
I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are gathered on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe.
The Canada Border Services Agency provides integrated border services that support national security and public safety priorities while facilitating the legitimate flow of persons and goods.
To accomplish this, the CBSA received $3.1 billion in funding through the Main Estimates for 2026-27. This represents an increase of $76.9 million, or 2.6%, compared to last year’s Main Estimates. This increase will support the agency in achieving several critical priorities.
Budget 2025 provided $669 million over five years and $198.3 million ongoing to strengthen Canada’s borders.
In 2026-27, the CBSA will receive $77 million through the Main Estimates to support this initiative. This funding will support the recruitment, training and deployment of 1,000 new CBSA officers, as well as an increased stipend for all border services officer trainees. The funding will also be allocated to investment in infrastructure at the CBSA College.
Through the Main Estimates, the CBSA will also receive additional funding to support capital investments for infrastructure projects. This includes land border crossings, notably for the modernization project at the Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle border crossing, the busiest land port of entry in Quebec; and for the Marine Container Examination Facilities at the Port of Vancouver.
The 2026-27 funding increases are partially offset by reductions. The CBSA’s Main Estimates include a total of $52 million of savings under the Government of Canada’s Comprehensive Expenditure Review. These savings will be achieved by reducing administrative overhead, streamlining internal business processes and making use of data to manage the workforce more efficiently. The agency is on track to achieve these savings by reducing the number of employees reporting to national headquarters in positions that provide internal, back-office support. As a result, there will be no reduction in front-line border operations.
Funding provided through the Main Estimates aligns with the priorities the CBSA has set out in its 2026-27 departmental plan. Whether it is countering organized crime groups who seek to smuggle contraband into and out of the country or supporting the Canadian economy through revenue collection and trade measures, the agency will be expanding many of its front-line and operational teams.
[Translation]
CBSA will continue to work closely with its partners to deliver Canada’s Border Plan.
In particular, this will include a focus on detecting and intercepting high priority import and export violations related to firearms, fentanyl and stolen vehicles, as well as human smuggling and inadmissible persons.
This will also include joint efforts with federal and provincial law enforcement partners to address the increasing and violent incidents of extortion in communities across the country.
The agency will continue to enhance the integrity and sustainability of the asylum system by focusing on the removal of inadmissible individuals. It will adapt its operations to manage detainees of all risk levels.
With respect to commercial operations, the CBSA will continue to ensure the effective application of duties and taxes, including surtaxes.
The agency will continue to administer Canada’s international trade compliance, trade remedies and related recourse systems efficiently, and support our country’s efforts to diversify trade through new free trade agreements and other economic and security partnerships.
The agency will also remain focused on the future through continuing to advance Traveller Modernization. This multi-year initiative will modernize traveller processing through a suite of new tools and technologies to make travel smoother while continuing to keep the border safe.
The funding provided through these Main Estimates will enable the agency to continue fulfilling its mandate.
I would like to close my remarks with a special note of thanks. I want to recognize the CBSA’s border service officers for their work on our front line. Their service enables the safe and secure flow of people and goods across the border during a time of increased pressure, scrutiny and uncertainty.
Mr. Chair, my colleagues and I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have about the CBSA’s Main Estimates.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Annie Rémillard, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: Good evening, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.
I would first like to acknowledge that we are gathered today on the traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe people.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss IRCC’s 2026-27 Main Estimates. In line with Budget 2025 and the minister’s mandate to return immigration to sustainable levels, the department is aligning its spending with reduced volumes and a more suitable operating model.
In the 2026-27 Main Estimates, the department is planning $4.42 billion in total funding. This represents a decrease of $757.1 million compared to the previous fiscal year.
These projections reflect a context of financial constraints and structural adjustments, while maintaining our commitment to modernization and sustainable immigration management.
[English]
A key driver of this decrease is the recent adjustment to immigration levels, as set out in the Immigration Levels Plans covering 2025 through 2028. As both permanent and temporary resident volumes decline, the department will see a corresponding funding reduction of $224.1 million.
The department will also see a funding reduction of $173.1 million for the Interim Federal Health Program, reflecting temporary funding previously provided to partially cover health care costs in 2026-27.
As part of the spending restraint set out in Budget 2025, the department is rationalizing programming and finding efficiencies in day-to-day operations while upholding the government’s longstanding commitment to resettle the world’s most vulnerable. These measures account for a $155-million reduction in funding in 2026-27.
Finally, this fiscal year is the final year of the Interim Housing Assistance Program extension. This extension supported a shift toward more forward-looking partnerships with jurisdictions, helping to reduce long-term reliance on federal funding. As a result, the department will see a corresponding $133-million decrease in funding.
[Translation]
All these adjustments will allow the department to better align its resources with the government’s key priorities.
These include the following: attracting skilled workers, particularly through the International Talent Attraction Strategy, expanding the use of technology and modernizing digital systems, and strengthening border and asylum processes to enhance security, fairness and efficiency.
Taken together, these proposed reductions in the Main Estimates will help guide the department’s activities starting in 2026-27.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to appear today. My colleague and I will be pleased to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Loffreda: Thank you to all our panellists for being here. My question is for the Canada Border Services Agency, Mr. Pilgrim.
I would like to turn briefly to the Arctic and the CBSA’s role in the North. Successive governments have underscored the strategic importance of the Arctic to Canada’s sovereignty, security and long-term economic development. However, I note your 2026-27 departmental plan contains no explicit reference to the Arctic or northern region operations.
At the same time, your minister’s 2025 transition materials highlight the need for early integration of CBSA requirements, such as infrastructure and staffing, into the development of Arctic trade corridors and port infrastructure.
Given this context, could you clarify CBSA’s current and planned role in the Arctic? How is the agency ensuring it is adequately resourced and positioned to support emerging northern trade routes while safeguarding Canada’s borders and advancing national security interests in the region — which we have seen with the announcements these past few weeks is of greater importance to our nation?
Mr. Pilgrim: Thank you for the question. Yes, the North is definitely a focus of the CBSA. Arctic trade, sovereignty and security are things we are dealing with quite closely. We are at the table with various departmental committees now, determining the best use of resources and locations of resources across the North. We are definitely part of the program, part of whatever ask there will be for funding, and we will serve where needed.
We are already present in the North in terms of cruise ships and other arrivals of that nature, so we have experience in the North, and we are ready, willing and able to provide additional services as required based on the strategy being put forth by the Prime Minister and the committees focusing on the North.
With the 1,000 new officers, we are getting the people power ready to move where needed. That is basically how we work, a risk-based approach, a priority-based approach of allocation of resources, and we will have 1,000 new resources on staff soon.
Senator Loffreda: Why was there no explicit reference in the 2026-27 departmental plan to the Arctic or the northern operations? Is there any reason for that? I’m just curious about that.
Mr. Pilgrim: It’s a good question. I agree. It should be there because it is a focus of ours. We have not received specific funding for it yet. But as I said, we’re at the table, at all the right committees, playing our part and ensuring that our capacity will be available when and where needed in the North.
Senator Loffreda: I was reading lately that Prime Minister Carney or the Canadian Armed Forces want to prove they could go it alone in the Arctic. If somebody picks up the departmental plan and asks what’s happening here, there will be a disconnect somewhere.
Mr. Pilgrim: Yes, it is a good point.
Senator Loffreda: It’s a good point, so maybe we could correct that going forward. Thank you.
The Canada Border Services Agency departmental plan introduces two new indicators relating to targeting the percentage of traveller targets examined that lead to a result and the percentage of commercial targets examined that lead to a result. Could you elaborate on the work of the National Targeting Centre? These indicators are improving CBSA’s ability to identify high-risk travellers, and shipments and security are becoming more important. How do you identify that?
Mr. Pilgrim: I will let my colleague answer.
Aaron McCrorie, Vice-President, Intelligence and Enforcement Branch, Canada Border Services Agency: Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the question. The indicators are doing a better job of measuring what we are doing. Our National Targeting Centre does a couple of different things. For all air passengers coming into the country, we are doing a risk assessment, assessing all passengers coming in and identifying those who might be inadmissible or those who might identify concerns about smuggling drugs, for example. We are identifying people who either we would ask for a no board — don’t get on the aircraft — or, if they are on the aircraft, we would subject them to additional examination upon arrival.
The other thing the National Targeting Centre regards is cargo coming into the country for the same reason, using their databases, their algorithms and their expertise to identify, for example, marine containers that may contain contraband goods. So what we’re trying to do with the indicators is a better job of demonstrating what we are doing. It is not changing what we are doing; it’s just doing a better job of demonstrating it.
Senator Loffreda: Thank you very much.
Senator Cardozo: My question will be on IRCC, Ms. Rémillard. I’m looking at the numbers and seeing a considerable decrease, from $5.9 billion to $4.4 billion. Talk to us a little about that, because there are a couple things I think are really important about our current system: We have a very credible system of screening and selecting immigrants, and we have the support for immigrant integration. Indeed, governments from around the world look at how we perform immigrant integration.
I’m therefore concerned when I see that level of decrease. I understand you are talking about the need for some cutbacks with the lower level of immigrants coming in. but I’m a bit concerned about the size. You have a series of organizations out there, and you have a department. Is this too much of a cut?
Ms. Rémillard: Thank you for the question. It can appear as a significant reduction. You touched on it, senator, where our funding is based on the Immigration Levels Plan. So the past Immigration Levels Plan, which was presented last year, was the first where we saw reductions to immigration level targets for both permanent residents and temporary residents. Again, the plan that was presented last year for 2026 to 2028 saw further reductions to temporary resident levels as well. It is natural that IRCC’s funding would decrease in proportion to those downward-revised admission targets.
So that is as much on the operating spending side as, as you mentioned, on the settlement services side. So the levels plan is one factor to this reduction. Our funding is tied to the plan. But we are seeing a further decrease as well due to the Comprehensive Expenditure Review, which, as I’m sure you know, was the government-wide exercise to reduce government spending to allow reinvestments in other priority areas. IRCC was not immune to that, so we have proposed very targeted and tailored reductions to some of our programs, but they still allow us to continue providing key support services to newcomers across the country.
Senator Cardozo: In terms of the screening and selection process, we have a bit of a backlog, don’t we?
Ms. Rémillard: We do have inventories, that’s correct, in different categories of admissions. Again, that is largely due to the fact that we have caps on how many temporary residents or permanent residents we allow into the country.
Senator Cardozo: By reducing the amount of funding, it seems to me if you weren’t reducing, you would have had a chance to deal with part of that backlog and get it under control. Or are you saying, in terms of the caps, we don’t have a backlog, and it’s just that other people have applied and they are in the queue?
Ms. Rémillard: Yes, I would phrase it that way. We have inventories of individuals who have applied, and they are in the queue to be processed and to be admitted when there is space to be able to admit them into the country.
Senator Cardozo: So you are meeting your caps?
Ms. Rémillard: Yes, we are, absolutely. We have met our targets for the plan in 2025. Now we are working toward achieving the 2026 plan.
Senator Cardozo: What’s the current system for immigration for seniors and grandparents? Is there a separate class for grandparents?
Ms. Rémillard: There is a program. I’m not familiar enough with the program to provide a lot of detailed information, but there is a category for parents and grandparents as well. I don’t have the data with me today to be able to provide you the number in the inventory or the wait times, but I would be happy to provide that.
Senator Cardozo: I would be interested because I understand that it is an area where there is a major backlog.
Ms. Rémillard: Sure.
Senator Cardozo: Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chair: Let’s continue on this topic. Bill C-12 has just been passed. This is having a major impact on your applications.
Ms. Rémillard: Yes.
The Chair: By how much does that reduce the rate . . . . If I understand correctly, there were arrears of a few hundred thousand dollars. How much do they go up with Bill C-12?
Ms. Rémillard: I’ll turn to my colleague to answer the question. Once again, I don’t have the exact figure with me today. The purpose of Bill C-12 was to reduce the inventory of the Immigration and Refugee Board.
Otherwise, regarding IRCC applications, this could represent an additional volume of applications to process. However, we are equipped to handle this additional volume after the bill’s passage.
I will turn to my colleague to see if she has anything to add.
Catherine Scott, Assistant Deputy Minister, Social Programs, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: Bill C-12 introduces two new grounds for ineligibility of asylum claims. Instead of submitting an asylum application, people will be directed to a pre-removal risk assessment. Over time, in fact, there will be fewer asylum claims submitted into the system, and people who are ineligible will be referred to the pre-removal risk assessment.
The Chair: Do you have any figures — before, after, returned, sent, directed to the new process?
Ms. Scott: Not at this time. The bill has just been passed. As a result, it is difficult to estimate the total number. However, over time —
The Chair: Can you send us what you currently have for the updated estimates in your books?
Ms. Scott: We can certainly look into the matter.
The Chair: Thank you. I’m sorry. This concerns a subject in which I am involved.
[English]
Senator Ross: My question is for Mr. Pilgrim. I am interested in a little more information on the 1,000 new officers. I note that it was announced by Prime Minister Carney that they would hire 1,000 new officers, but in your work plan, it mentions that being over three years. There is also a reference to the amendments to the Superannuation Act, and it has some earlier retirements than planned. You also mentioned some job losses or reduction of employees as part of the $52 million in savings as part of the expenditure review. Are you looking at 1,000 net new? Or how many people will you have to hire to get 1,000 net new employees?
Mr. Pilgrim: Thank you for the question. Yes, we will hire 1,000 net new officers. We will replace the attrition of officers who leave through retirement or move to other jobs. The capacity at the colleges and our satellite offices is such that we can manage the hiring over a three-year period of the 1,000 net new. The reductions that took place through the expenditure review exercise are non-front-line personnel. They’re back-office, administrative folks. The 1,000 new hires are all officers, front-line focused, and the folks impacted by the reduction exercise are non-front line. We are in good shape. We have a great inventory of candidates. It’s a very popular job. About 26,000 folks have applied lately, and we are in good shape and quite optimistic about getting the numbers trained on time and into the field as planned.
Senator Ross: So what is the timeline for having these folks trained and ready to hit the ground?
Mr. Pilgrim: We already have 68 in the field, hired as of April 2. As of June 2026, we will have hired 100 net new, excluding attrition and so on, with 180 training at the college in Rigaud.
Senator Ross: What is the length of training?
Mr. Pilgrim: It is 18 weeks. It is 14 weeks in person and 4 weeks online, with screening beforehand. Once you have been screened in, undergone medical and psychological testing and all the evaluations, it is an 18-week program. By 2028-29, we plan to have all 1,000 net new officers on staff.
Senator Ross: And how many do you predict that will take, to get to 1,000?
Mr. Pilgrim: The 1,000 is clean net new. We usually have attrition of about 250 per year of the existing 8,000 officers. We will replace the 250 or whatever the number might be. It might be higher with the 25-and-out retirement clause; we are ready for that. So the 250, plus the 1,000 over three years, is not a problem for the college.
Senator Ross: It is almost double, though, isn’t it?
Mr. Pilgrim: Yes, we received funding for investment in college infrastructure, and we have other satellite offices. Also, 200 of the 800 will not be trained at the college. There are different forms of operation: trade operations; recourse; intelligence, working for Mr. McCrorie; targeting criminal investigation; inland enforcement; and international officers, who will be trained by Global Affairs Canada. So there are about 800 trained in the college and 200 trained in alternate fields.
Senator Ross: And how many of those 1,000 are in these estimates?
Mr. Pilgrim: All of them. The money is in the budget for 2028-29 and ongoing funding thereafter. It is $669 million until 2030 and then $198 million ongoing to support the 1,000 new officers.
Senator Ross: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Gignac: Welcome to our witnesses.
My first question is for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.
I’ve gone through the Auditor General’s report. You may have some observations to share with us on this subject. You’ll be able to do that in writing.
The Auditor General noted in particular that the department was not very effective in following up once students had entered Canada. Basically, the follow-up is to find out if they are still in school and what is happening with them. That may have changed since then.
Have there been any developments since then to better track international students who have been granted the right to come to Canada?
Ms. Rémillard: You are referring to the Auditor General’s report on the international student program that was released at the end of March. This is very recent. Indeed, the department has taken note of the recommendations and takes them very seriously. It has committed to addressing the report’s recommendations as soon as possible. That said, I am not an expert on this program specifically. However, I can assure you that we take this seriously and are putting measures in place to address the recommendations.
Senator Gignac: Thank you.
My other question concerns a completely different subject. I will turn to the Canada Border Services Agency. Thank you for the work you do in both cases.
For detection or security reasons, artificial intelligence is a tool that can undoubtedly be very useful. Are you currently using it? Do you see the potential in it? What is the situation with the use of artificial intelligence?
Mr. Pilgrim: Thank you for the question.
Yes. This is something that is being carefully examined since it can provide assistance.
[English]
It is incumbent on us to utilize the best technology available to make our operations as efficient as possible. Mr. McCrorie can go into further detail, but we are going to be implementing a form of AI in our new travel modernization system, which will help border officers in their screening. So it is not the only source of decision making, but it is one source. We do it as part of the targeting of commercial goods coming into the country.
The processing power is incredible. It allows our officers time to focus on other higher-priority areas or move to different locations or different functions. It is something we are investigating heavily, working with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat to make sure we are implementing in the right way, with the right legislation and policy. It is something we are looking at.
Maybe Mr. McCrorie has more details on targeting from the Intelligence and Enforcement Branch.
Mr. McCrorie: Thank you for the question.
Right now, we’re using advanced data analytics. As Mr. Pilgrim suggested, we are starting to explore how we could use AI, but we are certainly making better use of the data we have. Whether it is our National Targeting Centre that creates algorithms that look at trade patterns and seizures that we have in the past that help refine their targets — learning from seizures so that when we have a tobacco seizure, for example, in southern Ontario, the information from that helps inform our targeting and the next search we do.
We are starting to use advanced analytics to look at the seizures happening at land points of entry and comparing those with immigration data to see if there are overlaps or linkages there.
We are making great use of the data we have, and, as Mr. Pilgrim suggested, we are starting to explore that next step of how we would, then, use artificial intelligence to take it even further.
Senator MacAdam: My question is for IRCC. I will continue with the Auditor General’s report.
In her report on international student program reforms, the Auditor General recommended that, in collaboration with provinces, IRCC should tailor its models for determining annual study permit allocations for each province. I see you have tabled a management action plan with the House Standing Committee on Public Accounts. It gives targets and timelines to work with the provinces and territories with an advisory group and exchange data, et cetera.
Can you elaborate more on the specific actions you are taking around this and the timelines?
Ms. Rémillard: If it is possible, we will get back to you with the information requested. We will be able to provide it in writing if that’s okay. We have some information on the action plan, but getting you the details you want in terms of the stakeholders with the provinces and territories, we can follow up with that.
Senator MacAdam: Okay, thank you.
Your departmental plan states that most departmental results indicators are being introduced for the first time and results from prior years are not available.
Why are they all new? Why are they not available from prior years?
Ms. Rémillard: That’s a great question.
We introduced new performance indicators in this year’s departmental plan. The reason why the historical or the comparison is not available is because they did not exist before. It is the first year; we will establish the baseline this year with these two performance indicators. Then, we will be able to compare future results against this baseline year.
Senator MacAdam: Why were the ones that you have now not done before? Has there been a new policy on results? I have been asking questions here at National Finance about this new policy on results. We’ve heard from the folks at the Treasury Board that they were planning on updating that policy.
Does that factor into some of the changes that you made with your targets and indicators?
Ms. Rémillard: The policy on results does guide the work we do, but this was actually an internal exercise that IRCC undertook to review its performance indicators, and it introduced some new ones. It is not necessarily directed by the Treasury Board but is an internal exercise to report on a new set of data.
Senator MacAdam: So this is your baseline year.
Ms. Rémillard: Yes.
Senator MacAdam: Okay, thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Hébert: Mr. Pilgrim, I want to revisit the issue of hiring new officers. We are in a time when it is not easy to attract and retain workers. You seem confident on reaching your targets. What’s your secret?
Mr. Pilgrim: The Canada Border Services College in Rigaud is very strong; we take care of our employees and our officers. I think it is seen as a lifelong job that is safe and secure, and features friendships and very strong support.
[English]
There is effective training and so on. The salary is competitive and strong. I don’t know. We’ve had much better success than similar agencies in recruitment. It is a pretty strong attraction for large numbers of people. The college is quite confident in making and maintaining the numbers and ensuring we have the highest quality of border services officers, or BSOs, available to protect the safety and security of Canada.
Senator Hébert: Okay.
I want to go back to the fentanyl issue. I know you had goals and also money invested, according to what our neighbour wanted us to do.
[Translation]
I think that, at a time when we are beginning the process of negotiating the revision of CUSMA, this is an issue that is likely to resurface. Do you have any concrete results on the issue of fentanyl that was raised, and which probably remains relevant in offices in Washington?
Mr. Pilgrim: We take this matter very seriously.
[English]
We have appointed a senior operational executive who is charged with coordinating activities related to opioids, reporting directly to the president. We had Operation Blizzard and very focused intelligence activities to ensure we are doing the utmost to protect imports and exports. In terms of information, 60% of all seizures of illegal narcotics come from the United States, so more is coming in. However, we are watching it carefully. We are ensuring, in terms of exports, that we are not sending any to our partners across the globe. We keep in close contact with our Five Eyes partners and others to make sure we are treating their countries as we would want to be treated in terms of imports and exports.
So, yes, it is something we’re watching. We have stats and report on the stats. Mr. McCrorie could probably get into the intelligence behind our tracking, our determinations and our success rates so far. It has been a good-news story, very focused on catching at the border, both ways, in and out.
Mr. McCrorie: From a fentanyl point of view, we are not a significant source of fentanyl being exported to anywhere in the world. Ryan referred to Operation Blizzard. That was about a year ago. In 2025, we seized about 2.8 kilograms of fentanyl, though bear in mind, very small amounts of fentanyl can be quite lethal. It doesn’t sound like a lot, but it is. It does matter.
We are also seeing that methamphetamine is moving through Canada to Oceania, Australia and New Zealand, or cannabis to the U.K. and Europe.
We had some pretty significant seizures last year. We seized 2,300 kilograms of methamphetamine and 46 kilograms of cannabis. When we look at a container, we don’t know if it will be fentanyl, cannabis or methamphetamine, but we are looking for it and are having success in doing so. As Ryan suggested, a lot of that is about working with our partners.
The Canadian Integrated Response to Organized Crime, which involves law enforcement across the country, ran a fentanyl sprint from May to October of this year, I think. In total, police services across Canada, including the CBSA, seized about 300 kilograms of fentanyl. That success was from law enforcement agencies working together. We are doing joint operations with the U.K. authorities to stop cannabis going to the U.K. We are doing joint operations with Australia and New Zealand to stop methamphetamine going there, and we work closely with the U.S. CBP to stop drugs from going either way across the Canada-U.S. border.
Senator Dalphond: Is there a working arrangement with CPKC? I visited their head office last year, and they have their own police and sophisticated screening. Everything that comes from the U.S. and enters Canada is scanned. Do they share information with you when they suspect something? Is that shared instantly? Are they doing part of the work you would normally do because they have their own police force? What arrangement do you have?
Mr. McCrorie: There is an obligation on the part of the railway companies, and CN and CPKC both have their own police forces. We don’t liaise with them directly, but there is an obligation on the part of the railway companies to provide information to us in advance of shipments arriving in Canada. U.S. Customs and Border Protection does 100% screening of railcars going to the U.S., and we are engaged in some conversations with them to see how we can share data between the U.S. and Canada in that regard.
Senator Dalphond: They go to Mexico. I could see from the head office in Calgary what was happening at the border in Mexico.
Mr. McCrorie: The Canadian Pacific Kansas City rail line has linkages from Mexico, through the U.S. and into Canada.
Mr. Pilgrim talked earlier about the allocation of 1,000 border services officers. It will be risk-based, and we will be looking at things like the marine mode and the rail mode in terms of the allocation of those resources.
Senator Dalphond: You don’t have to be at the border? Are they the first responders at the border?
Mr. McCrorie: The CN police and CPKC police? I hesitate to comment on their mandate. They are not necessarily playing a role in terms of stopping contraband coming into the country. It is more securing the railway operations. A byproduct of that may be stopping some smuggling, but it’s not their primary purpose.
Senator Dalphond: Thank you.
Senator Pupatello: I’m delighted to hear about the 1,000 extra officers. I’m curious to know about the borders. I come from Windsor, Ontario, and 25% of our trade goes through that corridor. My understanding is you will be bulking up, especially with the opening of the Gordie Howe International Bridge, and there will be the most sophisticated and modern kinds of equipment and so on.
When you have hauls at this border, and there have been many — drugs, guns, people, et cetera — they do investigations and come to find they are glad they caught them when they did because it might have been the tenth time the guy has gone through, so we missed the first nine. When you know that and when the police agencies are telling us this, we know the more you have at the border, the more you will catch. It’s almost like a guarantee: The more you have, the more you will catch.
The only reason you have these gangs doing business in the GTA is because of what’s coming in at the border in Windsor. You are solving their problem by stopping it at the border.
I’m curious to know how you balance what you are investing in a border where you have a guaranteed outcome that is positive for the whole of the GTA and beyond. How are you determining what is equipment, what is people and, of those 1,000, how many are destined for that border?
Mr. Pilgrim: Thank you. That is a very good question. We are looking forward to the opening of the Gordie Howe International Bridge. I was there touring it not long ago. It’s impressive. The technology is state of the art. It will be a great asset for the agency and the country.
The border services officers for the Gordie Howe International Bridge have all been hired. They are all on standby, ready to start. I believe there are 257 or so assigned to the bridge. The movement of people is all based on risk and volumes and priority across the country. With the various bridges there, the Ambassador Bridge and Rainbow Bridge, we move our people around based on need. Capacity-wise, that group for the Gordie Howe International Bridge has already been hired. That’s outside of the 1,000 net new as well. Yes, there will be a portion, and I have the numbers somewhere in my magic binder.
Senator Pupatello: Will it enhance the current crossings? I don’t know what you have at the vehicle tunnel, or the rail tunnel for that matter, but you do have a presence with the Ambassador Bridge. Will you be bulking up there?
Mr. Pilgrim: We will be bulking up across the country, largely in trade operations, commercial trade, doing more inspections and things like that. With the new investment from Fall Economic Statement 2024 in the border initiative, we are buying a significant amount of detection equipment that will go across the country. That will pay huge dividends in terms of our ability to scan, assess, manage and then determine what should be searched. Combined with the volume of new trade and commercial officers, we will have significantly more capacity across the country to interdict and find and stop guns and drugs from coming in. The intelligence keeps getting better under Mr. McCrorie’s watch. We are doing a good job. The searches we have done have been positive, and we have had good results.
Senator Pupatello: When you are doing searches, does your new equipment — AI or whatever else you are using — allow you to check more? When it is random, which is how everyone operates, do you get to do more random checks with the new equipment, so instead of checking 1 out of every 100 you might be checking 20?
Mr. Pilgrim: It is a multi-phased approach in terms of the intelligence of determining what to scan or what to search; but yes, with the new investment in technology detection equipment across the country, we will be scanning significantly more items going forward.
Senator Pupatello: I want quantum, like percentage.
Mr. McCrorie: I cannot give you a quantum. First and foremost, we try to be intelligence- and threat-driven. We had 5 million marine containers and about 4 or 5 million trucks across the border last year. Our goal is to leverage intelligence and information as much as possible to make the best use of the technology.
I have an example from the auto theft file. We don’t need technology to find a stolen car in a container. I can open the container and look at it, so that would not be a good use of the technology. With all the 2,300 vehicles we recovered two years ago, about 1,500 last year, it was the result of intelligence, tips from police and referrals from other authorities.
Senator Pupatello: Was it the Tile or the Apple AirTag they put in the car?
Mr. McCrorie: Sometimes it was the tag.
Senator Pupatello: I kind of resent that we make people use their iPhone to find their own damn car because it’s been stolen.
Mr. McCrorie: We work with police on that too.
Senator Pupatello: It’s not really a good response.
Mr. McCrorie: My point, though, is the technology is an aid. It helps us. There is a place for random searching, but you also want it to be targeted so you are making the best use of the technology.
Senator Pupatello: I understand.
Mr. McCrorie: Some technology is good at finding things hidden in metal machine parts. Others could be radiation detection. A lot depends on the purpose and need. We have a variety of options. Even our detector dogs play a role. It’s about making the best, smartest use of the technology driven by intelligence and information.
Senator Pupatello: You didn’t mention human trafficking. Are you doing anything on that front regarding enhancements?
Mr. McCrorie: It is part of our mandate insofar as we are enforcing the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. We have had instances where individuals are crossing illegally between the ports in Quebec and are involved in human smuggling. We have had investigations. It is a shared responsibility with the RCMP. Sometimes they lead; sometimes we lead. We have had some successful prosecutions as a result of the equipment.
Senator Pupatello: I meant the equipment, heat sourcing, that kind of equipment, for people. That’s what I meant.
Mr. McCrorie: When it is between the ports, it is the RCMP. They have technology. We typically don’t see people being smuggled, for example, in a truck at the port of entry. Human smuggling, to the extent we see it, is between the ports or using illegal or fraudulent documents.
Senator Pupatello: Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chair: I have a question for the Canada Border Services Agency. We do not have a biometric exit monitoring system: We monitor when people enter Canada — in airports, for example — but not when they leave, unlike other countries, or even now in Europe. Is that something that will happen soon? I understand that you rely on data transfers from airlines — we have already had that information — but do you intend to establish entry and exit systems to more accurately monitor the people who stay in the country and those who leave?
Mr. McCrorie: Thank you for the question. As you said, our entry and exit program would depend on the airlines, which provide us with information about the people who have left the country.
[English]
Mr. Pilgrim: The new system of transport modernization will provide significantly more advanced biometrics and allow us a lot of opportunities for better entry-exit management through biometrics and other means. So the tech will be there soon through the project. Then it will be a determination through legislation, privacy laws and so on what we implement and when. We are going to be in good shape for better entry-exit management going forward.
[Translation]
The Chair: Is it in the plans?
Mr. Pilgrim: Yes.
The Chair: Furthermore, in the departmental plan that discusses digital modernization and information technology, it’s evident that there have been technological shortcomings. In particular, it is said that systems modernization and the increased use of digital technologies are essential to support operations, but we also see in this year’s performance indicators that you missed the performance indicator. For example, you mentioned unexpected system outages and talk about the need to improve the reliability of digital platforms.
To what extent did the vulnerabilities or shortcomings that occurred affect or risk affecting security or operational efficiency?
Mr. Pilgrim: Thank you for the question. We had outages this year and we are well aware of it. We have a 10-point plan to improve our systems and our approach to handling outages. When there’s an outage, we want to ensure that check-ins and checkouts are handled manually. So, we’re adjusting our procedures to ensure safety is always maintained. Of course, we have systems that are reaching the end of their lifecycle and need to be replaced. We are currently replacing a large number of systems; there is the Contribution and Revenue Management System, or CRMS, which is new and working very well. We have the initiative to modernize passenger services, as well as the project focused on agent experience; the network they use to manage passenger arrivals and departures will be improved soon.
We’re working on it. We have systems that are not new; they are about thirty years old. We work closely with Shared Services Canada to ensure that in the event of an outage, communication can be maintained; we have a committee to manage outages and to ensure that security levels remain the same when systems go down. We operate using the paper method and verbal interviews between our officers and travellers. It’s less efficient, but it works when there is an outage.
The Chair: It’s not a plan B but a plan Z when you move to paper.
Mr. Pilgrim: Yes.
The Chair: If you are making technological changes, what percentage of the changes or improvements have you achieved so far compared to the full technology, or as you would like it to be, at 100%? How would you quantify that progress as a percentage?
Mr. Pilgrim: That’s a tough question. It depends on the system. For systems like the CRMS for goods imported into Canada, we are at 100%. For traveller management, we are perhaps at 60% currently; it’s a big change.
We are making adjustments so that the system works with somewhat outdated infrastructure. We do what is necessary to ensure the system functions well and does not fail, and we will make investments with our partners at Shared Services Canada in areas where there is a higher risk of outages. But it depends on the system. We have several projects —
The Chair: Can you give us details on what is publishable?
Mr. Pilgrim: Yes; we have a very detailed five-year investment plan. Everything is there; I think it’s online. We have all the details on the planned expenses and previous expenses.
The Chair: The progress grid, the functionality tests?
Mr. Pilgrim: What the outcome will be, where we stand — yes, we have that information for all our projects.
The Chair: Yes, we would be grateful to you.
Senator Hébert: It could be a written response afterwards. I wanted to know what was included in $2.3 billion of transfer payments and how that amount was broken down. If I am not mistaken, the transfers to Quebec are probably there. In the amount of $1.5 billion . . . . What proportion of transfer payments is affected by the $1.5 billion reduction in the total budget? For transfer payments, what was projected and what is the reduction? I’d like you to send me this information in writing.
Ms. Rémillard: We can provide you with the answer in writing. Quickly, I can roughly explain our grants and contributions to you. The Canada-Quebec agreement represents a very large part of it — a total of $867 million has been set aside for this purpose. Next, our settlement program is our other largest contribution program, with a total amount of $960 million. The resettlement program is also a large program, and there are other small programs. We can provide you with a written response.
Senator Hébert: Yes, and also on the difference compared to last year.
Ms. Rémillard: Yes.
Senator Gignac: In the same ballpark, regarding the grant for the Interim Housing Assistance Program, it has decreased from $526 million in 2024-25 to $250 million. What happened? Roxham Road has been closed and fewer refugees are showing up? Is that the answer?
Ms. Scott: It is a two-year investment, so we have signed agreements with about a dozen municipalities to help them with temporary housing. It is an envelope of approximately $680 million over two years. This year is the last year of the cycle, so the amount is a bit lower, but these are agreements that have already been signed with the municipalities, mainly in Ontario.
Senator Gignac: Thank you.
The Chair: Is it not in Quebec because you cannot sign directly with Quebec?
Ms. Scott: No, there was a transfer with Quebec in 2024 for previous years.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Cardozo: On the drug issue, we talked about a Fentanyl Czar who was supposed to be catching drugs coming from Canada to the U.S. I think we thought drugs and guns came from the U.S. to Canada. Has having this position and the increased efforts of the Fentanyl Czar had any effect on reducing the northward flow of drugs and guns?
Mr. McCrorie: Kevin Brosseau was the Fentanyl Czar versus — Ryan referred to the fact we appointed an individual to be our counter-narcotics or counter-opioids within the agency —
Senator Cardozo: I’m thinking of the increased presence of law enforcement at the border. Has that reduced the drugs and guns coming northward?
Mr. McCrorie: I wouldn’t say there is a reduction. If you look at the total seizures we had last year in 2025, I think the number was down but the volume was up. It depends on how you want to measure it. I think one of the things during my time on the job that I have seen is we are confronted with a very agile adversary. We are dealing with transnational organized crime. They are going to make money wherever they can: stealing cars and selling them overseas, extortion and smuggling drugs and guns.
What they will do is if they are having success in the marine mode and we start to shut that down, they will move to the postal mode. If we have success there, they will move to the trucking mode. Whether it is our own czar or the Kevin Brosseau as the national czar, it has actually focused national attention on the need to address these issues.
Kevin, in particular, has broadened the mandate and is also looking at social determinants and health care and mental health support to deal with the demand side, if you will, as well as the supply side.
I don’t have data for you, but I would say we are making a difference.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you very much.
We’ll resume today’s meeting with the second group of witnesses. Today, we are pleased to welcome Richard Goodyear, Chief Financial Officer, and Candice St-Aubin, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy and Partnerships, Indigenous Services Canada. We also welcome Manon Nadeau-Beaulieu, Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer, and Mary-Luisa Kapelus, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Strategic Direction, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.
Welcome, and thank you for accepting our invitation to appear today. We will begin with the preliminary remarks from Mr. Goodyear and Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu.
[English]
Richard Goodyear, Chief Financial Officer, Indigenous Services Canada: Good evening, Mr. Chair and honourable senators. Thank you for the invitation to appear before you to discuss the 2026-27 Main Estimates for Indigenous Services Canada, or ISC.
I would like to begin by acknowledging that we come together on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe.
Before we begin, I have the pleasure of having with me Candice St-Aubin, as was noted, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy and Partnerships; as well as some other sector colleagues for additional support on specific topics.
The total amount of ISC’s 2026-27 Main Estimates is $24.1 billion, of which $7.1 billion, or 29.3%, is intended for health; $7.0 billion, or 29.2%, is for children and families; $5.2 billion, or 21.5%, is for infrastructure and environments; $3.7 billion, or 15.2%, is for education; and the remaining $1.1 billion, or 4.8%, will be to support economic development, governance and internal services.
[Translation]
With these Main Estimates, Indigenous Services Canada will continue to make meaningful progress towards its objectives, particularly in addressing key priorities in 2026-27. The department is committed to promoting the development of strong and resilient Indigenous communities. This includes sustained efforts to reduce long-standing social and economic barriers such as limited access to safe housing, clean drinking water, quality health services and community-managed climate-resilient infrastructure.
Capacity building remains essential to helping communities strengthen their governance structures, develop their skills and access the resources required to advance self-determination and improve long-term well-being.
[English]
ISC is making investments in Indigenous youth to reinforce services for families and cultivate environments where children and youth can thrive. This includes improving access to essential health, social and educational supports; advancing long-term reform of the First Nations Child and Family Services Program; and funding culturally grounded K-12 and adult education pathways that promote lifelong learning.
For example, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal recently formally endorsed an $8.5-billion agreement to reform the First Nations Child and Family Services Program in Ontario. This agreement will support equitable, culturally grounded and First Nations-led child and family services and will make a difference in the lives of First Nations children in Ontario. In the months ahead, officials will continue to engage directly with First Nations in every region to advance reform of the First Nations Child and Family Services Program. That work will continue to be founded in a deep respect for regional realities and a conviction that when First Nations are in charge, children do better.
[Translation]
ISC is creating stronger pathways to Indigenous economic participation, ensuring communities can fully leverage opportunities for long-term prosperity. Key actions focus on supporting the development of major projects, enhancing planning and financial readiness, expanding access to community development supports, increasing Indigenous business participation in federal procurement and integrating climate resilience into economic development programs.
[English]
ISC will prioritize the delivery of effective, efficient programs and culturally relevant, high-quality services. This includes supporting strong First Nation governance and service-delivery capacity, improving access to essential digital and administrative tools, advancing Indigenous data sovereignty and data-sharing frameworks and providing clear pathways to help communities navigate governance processes and move toward self-determination.
Mr. Chair, please rest assured that our primary goal through collaboration with Indigenous partners is to advance their priorities while holistically supporting their well-being and self-determination. We sincerely hope that our combined efforts will encourage greater respect, understanding and meaningful progress toward reconciliation.
[Translation]
I look forward to discussing all aspects of these Main Estimates with you, and I would be pleased to answer your questions.
Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Manon Nadeau-Beaulieu, Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada: Thank you, Mr. Chair and honourable senators, for the invitation to review the 2026-27 Main Estimates for Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.
Before we begin, I would like to recognize that we are coming together today on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe.
In my capacity as Chief Financial Officer for the department, I am pleased to present these estimates and respond to any questions you may have, along with my colleagues, namely Mary-Luisa Kapelus, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Strategic Direction.
As you know, our department remains committed to renewing the relationship with Indigenous Peoples, as well as enabling prosperity in the North and in the Arctic. Accordingly, these Main Estimates are fundamental to achieving this mandate.
[Translation]
For 2026-27, the Main Estimates will provide the department with total funding of $11.9 billion in investments. Specifically, a total of $7.4 billion will enable the department to manage litigation and negotiate the settlement of claims, advancing reconciliation by resolving long-standing claims through fair, negotiated approaches that support community healing, investment and economic development.
Concretely, in 2026-27, we aim to resolve 35 specific claims, meet all legislated timelines and continue improving processes in alignment with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The department also prioritizes negotiated settlements over litigation.
Additionally, $2.4 billion in funding will support the management and implementation of agreements and treaties, including the conclusion of a number of arrangements. These joint efforts, which lead to tangible agreements with partners, ensure the Government of Canada can meet its legal obligations towards addressing Indigenous rights, priorities and interests.
[English]
A portion of these Main Estimates, totalling $325 million, will be allocated to Indigenous organizations to deliver a range of individual and community services in order to enhance Métis, Inuit and First Nation people’s access to culturally competent and Indigenous-led services, such as cultural, housing and infrastructure programming, as well as wellness and healing services.
In collaboration with territorial, Indigenous and provincial partners, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada will continue to advance the pursuit of a strong and prosperous northern and Arctic region through investments of over $1.2 billion this fiscal year.
[Translation]
Of this funding, $783 million will be provided to continue remediation of contaminated sites to ensure northern lands, water and natural resources are sustainably managed. Support will also be provided towards clean energy and climate monitoring projects through $47 million in funding, in order for northern and Indigenous communities to build resiliency to changing environmental conditions.
Food security remains a top departmental priority, with $179 million supporting improved access to and the affordability of nutritious retail and locally produced food, as well as other essential items, in 124 isolated northern communities. The department will continue to build on recent expansions by advancing food systems and co-delivery approach guided by Indigenous and northern partners, while responding to findings from the evaluation and Indigenous-led food security research.
[English]
Finally, $151 million will support developing solutions to challenges and ensure regional capacity needs and priorities are addressed. For example, part of these funds will allow the advancement of the devolution of responsibilities for lands and natural resources to the Government of Nunavut, which is set to be concluded by the end of the fiscal year. These funds will also support the advancement of regional governance approaches to address housing gaps.
[Translation]
Mr. Chair, these Main Estimates will enable the Government of Canada to continue the concrete work to renew the relationships between Canada and First Nations, Inuit, Métis, and modern treaty and self-governing partners, as well as to further advance work in the North and in the Arctic.
I am pleased to answer any questions.
Thank you. Meegwetch.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Loffreda: Thank you all for being here this late on this Wednesday night.
My question relates to the Indigenous Business Directory. This appears to be a strong and impactful initiative. The results reported in your departmental plan are encouraging. I would invite you to elaborate on the work under way to further strengthen the directory, particularly with respect to maintaining its credibility and integrity. In that regard, I note the department has undertaken compliance audits of registered businesses and is enhancing verification processes.
Could you speak to how these measures are being implemented, what challenges you have encountered and how you are ensuring that the directory remains a trusted and reliable tool for promoting Indigenous economic participation, development and prosperity?
Mr. Goodyear: I will turn to Keith Conn, who can answer that question.
Keith Conn, Assistant Deputy Minister, Lands and Economic Development, Indigenous Services Canada: Thank you for the question. One of my portfolios is the Procurement Strategy for Indigenous Business, which has received a lot of attention in the past few years.
We are working closely with partners to look at strengthening the integrity of the Indigenous Business Directory, looking at a more rigorous approach in terms of applicants that want to be part of the directory. We need to look at the applicant’s corporate structure, the makeup of their business in terms of 51% ownership plus control of the organization — not just ownership but control — that the owners, day to day, influence the operations of the business.
We are also working closely with partners in looking at perhaps devolving the Indigeneity aspect of businesses that want to come into the directory. We are working closely with First Nations, Inuit and Métis to look at how they could be the central force around — they know who their people are. They know who their members are and who is out in the field. Perhaps that is the best place for them, while we maintain a policy authority, reporting on the 5%, with all federal departments and agencies. So, it will be a collaborative approach.
We have a blueprint that we are still working on with partners across the country to bring this forward to the government of the day. Thank you.
Senator Loffreda: Thank you very much for that. Keep up the great work on promoting Indigenous businesses.
My next question concerns the data underpinning your performance indicators, particularly those related to the physical and mental well-being of Indigenous Peoples, as outlined in tables 1 and 2 of your 2026-27 departmental plan. The results are concerning. They underscore the importance of sustained investments and targeted supports for First Nations, Inuit and Métis communities.
More specifically, could you elaborate on the methodologies used to collect this data? What does your engagement and outreach process look like? How are surveys, such as regional health surveys, designed and conducted? The results are concerning.
Additionally, how do you ensure that the data collected is representative, culturally appropriate and reflective of the lived experiences of Indigenous communities, which is an important matter of concern?
Mr. Goodyear: Thank you. I will pass that to Candice.
Candice St-Aubin, Vice-President, Health Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada: Thank you very much for the question.
I agree that data paint a picture — an important picture of investments, but not just investments; it is also the context in which the data is gathered, both in terms of geography, quality of life and access to other supports, such as housing, food security, et cetera, when we are talking about mental health and wellness.
When it comes to data gathering, accessing and creating a baseline of measurement has been a challenge to date, and it continues to be. However, we have made investments to build that baseline data, working directly with communities and First Nations, including building data-gathering capacity and a baseline ability to do that within community, as you were talking about, flagging the need for it to be culturally relevant and culturally safe in the data.
When it comes to the approaches that fed into the tables you were talking about, I am happy to provide that in writing, because it is a bit more technical. I have the number here: We have provided $108 million since 2022 with the First Nations Information Governance Centre, or FNIGC, to ensure that First Nations, Inuit and Métis have direct access and support through funding to build that data governance so they are informing the data in which we historically gather through Statistics Canada, which we have used. But it has limits — sampling size — that we can actually access and use. It is something we continue to work on, but when it is related to the specific tables, I’m happy to provide that in writing.
Senator Cardozo: I want to ask about the child and family services settlement — the $8.5 billion. First, I will ask you to explain the mandates of each of your departments — how they are different and where you work together.
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: I can give it a try. In a nutshell, ISC is responsible for all Indigenous Peoples who fall under the Indian Act, and CIRNAC will look over those under modern treaties, the Inuit and Métis.
Ms. St-Aubin: Indigenous Services Canada is actually represented by its name. We separated the departments to ensure that there was a direct relationship with those members who wished to engage directly with the Crown when we talk about modern treaties. Indigenous Services Canada is actually providing core services to Indigenous Peoples, like health, infrastructure, housing, water and Non-Insured Health Benefits, directly to the people with communities.
Our relationships are really on the ground in communities to ensure those direct and accessible essential services for those on-reserve, captured within the Indian Act, but also for working with Inuit, within the Inuit Nunangat and directly with Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, or ITK, and Inuit land organizations to ensure they can provide those types of services for those citizens.
Senator Cardozo: Not the Métis?
Ms. St-Aubin: That’s a different space. With Métis, we provide some support, in particular with mental health. We have seen through the pandemic that there was a need for additional support. However, often it will be in partnership with provinces and territories. We have a relationship with certain components in the urban environment as well. We have a lot of status First Nations and Inuit who move off-reserve into the urban space. You will see some Métis having access to the national friendship centres, for example, which we do provide funding for. So it is not as clear or easily delineated, I would say.
Mary-Luisa Kapelus, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Strategic Direction, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada: If I could add to that, at Crown-Indigenous Relations, it’s more about a self-determined approach in terms of how we work with Indigenous partners. As my colleague Ms. St-Aubin was referring to, we do a lot of treaty advancement work, work around the relationship and the settling of historic grievances. However, we also provide housing to Métis partners through a self-determined approach. This gets to the earlier question about culturally relevant data. We work with partners to ensure that the funding goes out in the way they want it to, and they report back to us in a culturally appropriate way, whether it is housing or in other areas. It’s a different type of relationship.
Senator Cardozo: So it is more treaty-based?
Ms. Kapelus: Yes. It is more relationship-based, as Ms. St-Aubin has said —
Senator Cardozo: Does all the funding for the Native Friendship Centre Program come through you?
Ms. Kapelus: Yes.
Senator Cardozo: The child and family services settlement, where is that at? Has the money started to flow to people? What is the mechanism, and how much will flow and when?
Kirsten Mattison, Director General, Children, Families and Learning, Indigenous Services Canada: Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair. There are three key, big numbers in the child and family services space that we come back to over and over. The $8.5 billion that we talked about was the agreement that Indigenous Services signed with the Chiefs of Ontario and the Nishnawbe Aski Nation for the long-term reform of child and family services in Ontario. That was signed on March 30, 2025. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal issued a letter decision approving that agreement.
There is $35.5 billion that has been announced and set aside for regional negotiations to achieve long-term reform of the program in the rest of the country. Those negotiations are under way, and that initiative is ongoing. All that money is to deliver services under a reformed program that ends the discrimination found in 2016.
There is another piece that was $23.3 billion overall and agreed to in April 2023. That’s what we call the settlement agreement. That’s compensation to individuals who were harmed in previous years or their family members. There are nine classes of individuals who will be able to apply for compensation under the compensation agreement. It has been a bit slower than initially envisioned to roll out. Two of the nine classes are currently open for applications from individuals who were harmed by discrimination — what they call the removed child class or the removed child family class, meaning family members of removed children who were residents, ordinarily on-reserve or in the Yukon, from 2017 to 2022. We can get you the years specifically in writing because I’m now blanking on this. There are nine different classes, but the first two have opened for applications. Each class is being negotiated individually and submitted individually to the federal court for approval before it opens. A lot of care is being taken to ensure that every individual who is eligible for that pot of $23.3 billion is able to come forward. It was slightly delayed, but it is now beginning to roll out.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Ross: My question is for Indigenous Services Canada. I was looking at the 2026-27 departmental plan and the result indicators. I noticed that they are very different and there are a lot fewer of them than in the previous year. There were seven categories in the 2025-26 plan, and each of those had quite a robust list under them. In this new plan, there are only three categories — shorter lists, and it is really difficult to compare the lists. I’m wondering how you compare year-over-year results and why that change was made.
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Thank you for the question, senator. Indeed, we did review the Departmental Results Framework, or DRF, this year. The idea behind the review was to eliminate some overlap between results. For example, self-determination and socio-economic conditions were kind of saying the same thing. We kept most of the results; they are just not in the same spot. We can find them in the GC InfoBase. We can provide a crosswalk, if you want, but the idea was also to help us tell the story around what we are doing on a day-to-day basis, to modernize the overall wording that we are using in the DRF, and adding for the North the Arctic component, which is brand new for our Minister of Northern and Arctic Affairs right now. So, we have removed 15 departmental indicators, but they are now indicated in GC InfoBase, so we can compare and continue to see if we are achieving our results over time. We have not let them go; we have just moved them.
Senator Ross: So it is still there?
[Translation]
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Yes. They do not appear in the departmental plan only because a different software is being used. GC InfoBase is another way to describe programs and indicate how results will be adjusted. We left them there, not because they were unimportant, but because they were less representative of what we wanted to show in the departmental plan.
[English]
Senator Ross: Thank you very much.
[Translation]
Senator Gignac: Welcome to the witnesses. Thank you for what you do. It is important to improve the situation of Indigenous peoples and to compensate for all the abuses they have experienced in the past.
My question is for Indigenous Services Canada. You were talking about governance and financial transparency. I believe this law is still in effect, even if you do not enforce it; it is a 2013 law, the First Nations Financial Transparency Act. Its purpose was the release of the audited financial statements so that people could access them.
What I understand from consulting your website is that, for all sorts of reasons, it was decided to put this on hold in 2015. However, on November 26, 2025, there was a Federal Court decision because someone wanted to obtain the financial information and ultimately won. The Federal Court gave you 30 days to provide the information, as this person wanted to have the band council’s financial statements.
Did you comply with this decision? Do you intend to reconsider this to finally implement the 2013 Financial Transparency Act? I would like an update: What is the status?
Mr. Goodyear: Thank you for the question. Now, when we receive the financial statements from the First Nations, we publish them. We always do that. In addition, in all the agreements we have with the communities, we ask them to respond to financial questions in the same way as for their financial statements; this is part of the agreements. It is necessary to determine whether the First Nations provide the financial statements. We already have these two ways of doing things.
Senator Gignac: It’s new. Since 2017, you had suspended publication because communities were not required and you did not compel them to publish their financial statements. You can’t post anything if you don’t receive anything. You may publish what you receive, but you do not make it mandatory for all Indigenous communities to publish their financial statements, unless I have missed something. This is new. Does this mean that now, for all Indigenous communities, people can have information about budgets and the use of funds on an annual basis?
Mr. Goodyear: What we receive, we publish.
Senator Gignac: I understand.
What you receive, you publish, but you hardly receive any of them. You suspended enforcement of the law because the law required Indigenous communities to provide them to you and required you to publish them. Do you intend to review this in light of the November 2025 judgment? If a person wants to have the information, will they have to go to the Federal Court each time, for all communities, to get the information, or do you intend to take a look at this?
Mr. Goodyear: We are studying this very carefully to determine how we will proceed with the old rule, but no decision has been made yet. As I said, we are now publishing the financial statements. Furthermore, the information is provided in the agreement, as this information is requested when agreements are made. As a result, we receive this information from First Nations, but we are closely examining how to move forward with the First Nations Financial Transparency Act.
Senator Gignac: Thank you.
Senator Dalphond: I’m looking at the budget, and it’s the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations that handles treaties and claims settlement. The amount indicated does not include . . . . You said that you were going to negotiate 105 claims this year?
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Actually, 35 claims.
Senator Dalphond: Thirty-five claims?
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Yes.
Senator Dalphond: You have an amount set aside for . . . . You don’t know yet? Will we have the amount after negotiations are finished?
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: No. Currently, we have $1.5 billion, if I’m not mistaken, just for specific claims. The 35 that I mentioned in my opening remarks is our indicator, and so each year, we commit to resolving a minimum of 35 disputes. In recent years, we have always been able to exceed this number: last year, in 2024-25, we resolved 69 claims, the previous year, 42, and the year before that, 56. All in all, it’s going well.
The reason why we are unable to answer at this time is that 35 is our best forecast. We reach negotiated settlements with the First Nations, so we are subject to the negotiations, the time it takes, and the approvals from both sides. Optimistically, it could take two months, but it could take three years, so it is difficult to predict. We generally have a good idea. The relationships we maintain with the First Nations allow us to have a better understanding of where they stand in relation to us and to the claim presented.
Because of this, in my budget, I start with an amount from the Main Estimates, then, at the end of the year, I often come back with Supplementary Estimates because I need to carry forward funds due to delays or unforeseen circumstances. I will likely get back to you to discuss the Supplementary Estimates (B), with a carry-forward of funds in the same amount as last year, because it is not included in my current amounts.
Senator Dalphond: So $10 billion is an estimate of what could happen in relation to about 35 settlements?
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: About that.
Senator Dalphond: However, if we settle 40, there will be five missing, unless the payment amounts are lower than you had anticipated. There are several parameters.
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Indeed. We also manage cash flow based on what we receive, then we do a . . . . In English, you would say a “replenishment,” so we replenish the fund as we go. That is why we will probably see each other again at the Supplementary Estimates (B).
Senator Dalphond: If we do 35 per year and suddenly there are 105, does that mean the claim pool will dry up in three years, or do we receive new ones every year?
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: There are at least 700 claims remaining in our inventory. We don’t have control over when we receive claims, so it’s really related to my potential liabilities, which are being discussed a lot at this table. When I receive the claim, depending on the amount being claimed, that is when I’ll be able to determine what my potential liability is.
So, we currently have an inventory of about 730, if I remember correctly. I could provide you with the exact figure.
Senator Dalphond: There are 730 in the inventory, and 105 of them are ready for negotiation, is that right?
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: The number 35 is the one I’m aiming for this year. Currently, we have a large number of mandates that are being negotiated. I’m not sure that I can share the number with you, but I can probably send it to you in writing. I won’t be able to identify the community in particular or the number, but I can give you a general idea of where we stand with specific claims.
Senator Dalphond: Is your inventory of 730 a closed inventory or an inventory that increases each year?
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: It depends on the categories. In there, I have [Technical difficulties] some that are closed, because we negotiated most of the pieces that we had to negotiate. For others, it may come back again. We can receive more, but it’s difficult to estimate who will be sending them and when. That’s the question that —
Senator Dalphond: So, you have work for years to come.
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Absolutely. I don’t think we’ll run out of work.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: My question is for Indigenous Services Canada.
I noted that you are requesting contributions for First Nations and Inuit primary health care and First Nations elementary and secondary educational advancement, which are key decreases from the previous year. I’m wondering if you could explain the main factors behind those decreases.
Mr. Goodyear: Thank you for the question.
We are comparing, first of all, Main Estimates to Main Estimates. It’s important to understand that we have other opportunities to bring in funding. We manage resources and secure funds to address the areas that are needed, and additional funding adjustments will be requested in the fiscal year supplementary estimates. For example, we have seen adjustments in the past few years that have increased our funding at the midyear point for the past three years.
While it appears there’s a decrease, Main Estimates over Main Estimates, we still have the supplementary estimates process to seek additional funding, and we will do that.
Senator MacAdam: I’m hearing that you expect to request additional funds.
Mr. Goodyear: We expect to use the supplementary estimates process, yes.
Senator MacAdam: Okay. Thank you.
Senator Pupatello: My questions are to Mr. Goodyear.
I am curious how many First Nations are required to submit financial statements to you annually. How many are you getting annually so far?
Mr. Goodyear: Thank you for your question. I don’t have the exact number of statements we receive readily available.
Senator Pupatello: Ballpark — 1,000?
Mr. Goodyear: I would rather not provide a guess, but we can certainly provide you in writing in terms of what we get.
Senator Pupatello: How many are you getting now, financial statements?
Mr. Goodyear: There are some nations certainly that struggle with capacity, and we are helping with funding and support where we can. There are many nations that are highly functioning with a lot of capacity, and they continue to provide their financial statements. But there are some, certainly, that struggle, given the number and type of reports that we require. Some can be quite complex. We recognize that and are working with all First Nations to try to reduce the reporting burden as well as assist with the —
Senator Pupatello: I’m after a quantum here, if you don’t mind.
Mr. Goodyear: I appreciate that. Again, I will have to come back to you in writing with the numbers.
Senator Pupatello: If you can, please submit how many are required to and how many you are getting. The way you’re saying it, I think we might be surprised at the results. I’m wondering why that is not a priority for you to build capacity because you also build confidence in the system when you do that, and that’s good for everybody.
Mr. Goodyear: Absolutely.
Senator Pupatello: Because there is so much more money that we are spending, we need to be sure that the public is confident in how everyone is spending it. So this becomes more of a priority the more that is spent. I think that is really critical. I look forward to that.
Can I ask Ms. St-Aubin about friendship centres? Was there any question that they wouldn’t be funded annually? Was there a reason? A couple months ago, they seemed to not know whether their funding would continue because it’s part of an estimate that you had to be sure was completed. I didn’t realize that something like friendship centres would be annualized decision making like that. Could you help me with that?
Ms. St-Aubin: For sure. Thank you for the question. I appreciate it.
The reason there was this sense or question, certainly by external partners — not just the friendship centres, to be clear — was that there was a delay in hearing back from us on the sunsetting process, which, as you know, is part of every programmatic way we seem to do our business here at Indigenous Services Canada, as a large portion is sunsetting. So it was not a question of if, yes or no; all we knew was that we did submit a request for the future, to look ahead for multiple sun-setters, and the friendship centres were among them. We received a decision, and they were funded again and renewed. It was a five-year renewal that came in through the friendship centres, but it was just part of the overall process that we do every —
Senator Pupatello: So those increments, were they always five years? So this might not happen again every five years. You need to go through that process — is that correct?
Mr. Goodyear: Thank you for the question. If I may, it often depends on the program. It is important for us to acknowledge the fact that to review programs on a regular basis — and when a program sunsets, it allows the opportunity to review the efficiency of the program, to review requirements to ensure it is still delivering on its mandate. When a program sunsets, we then go back to government and outline our plan. We talk about things that have changed and how we can do things better. If that is deemed to be appropriate, the assessment, then the program is funded.
Often, it can be five years or two years. In some cases, it can even be one year depending on the type of program.
Ms. St-Aubin: And also the context at the time. Apologies for jumping in on that.
Mr. Goodyear: Absolutely.
Ms. St-Aubin: The friendship centres did have an ongoing A-Base source of funding, but over the past few budgets — I would say even dating back six years — there were various top-ups or additions, certainly during the pandemic. We saw many programs that saw additional top-ups to support Canadians — all Canadians, including Indigenous Canadians — to see them through what were challenging times. The friendship centres were a large part of that response. So they did see an increase at that time. But everything in that portion would have been time limited to allow for what my colleague was saying about a reflection point.
Senator Pupatello: So probably some of that concern was maybe they had hired some additional staff and didn’t know whether those people would be able to carry on, but there was a base funding and a good certainty of that part.
Ms. St-Aubin: Continues, exactly. Yes.
Senator Pupatello: Okay.
Ms. St-Aubin: And I would ask, even, are those activities that are attached? When we talk about reporting, it’s attached to an activity. Were these activities still needed? Are they still needed even now? Because we know times change. It feels like every two days now, things are changing. We have to do our due diligence, ensuring those activities are still required. Do we need a different set of activities to respond to the nature —
Senator Pupatello: The amount of money being set aside for additional health benefits — there is a big chunk there assigned to health benefits — I’m not sure who is in charge of that. But can you specify what type of service is on the rise? Is that telling a story that indicates we need to be looking at that more in depth somehow? That’s certainly the case with other ministries where the health benefits are through the roof —
Ms. St-Aubin: For sure.
Senator Pupatello: — and we need to get into the details of what it is. Are they mental health issues required or more programming in certain areas?
Ms. St-Aubin: Thank you for that question, senator. I assume you are talking about the Non-Insured Health Benefits. Again, we will have to provide specific data because we gather quite comprehensive data on access of the individual services that we’re supporting. But we have seen some trends, certainly in the mental health space, as you just referenced, but also medical travel to access primary care services that are not available, perhaps in more rural or remote communities where they have to fly south to access some of the primary care that is offered through the provincial system. I’m happy to come back to the committee in writing with data related to access.
Senator Pupatello: Do you do the analysis of that health benefit so that you’ll learn it’s better to pay for a locum to send the physician versus sending multiple families — who does that? Is that your department? Do you do that analysis for those kinds of benefit questions?
Ms. St-Aubin: Thank you for the question. That analysis is ongoing. Unfortunately, because it is actuals that we are paying or receipts that you submit to your provider, we work very similarly in that fashion. We need to look at trends and where we are seeing the costs increase, certainly around medical travel being one of the larger drivers, and we need to receive and do that analysis.
Again, a lot of it is around whether you have the infrastructure to sustain flying in physicians, flying in dentists, et cetera. But if there is no place for them to deliver those services, which is a provincial requirement on the provincial side, very jurisdictionally driven — but that analysis is ongoing.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you very much. The departmental plan states that a comprehensive expenditure review anticipates spending reductions of approximately $210 million spread over three years, with $69,300,000 in 2026-27, and the same amount for the following years. I quote: “Further details will be made available upon implementation,” but it is not determined where this money will come from or how you will make these cuts. These are still significant cuts. How can you reassure us and say that there will be no real impact on the services or on the department? There is a number, but it’s to be determined.
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Regarding the expenditure review, as you know, we started with a request for a 15% reduction for all departments. In the budget, the target for Crown-Indigenous Relations was reduced to 2%, and I believe it is the same for Indigenous Services Canada. Following this adjustment, we did the review again. We’re still in talks with the Department of Finance to determine where the cuts will really need to be made. There are several proposals on the table that include reductions both in our operating funds and contributions, where the department could be just as effective without penalizing First Nations. We’re still negotiating and discussing it with the Department of Finance. We’ll be happy to revisit it once the discussions are finished.
However, for Crown-Indigenous Relations, we already had a salary deficit that we have been carrying for a few years. We still reduced staff numbers, which was announced. We impacted 13 management positions and 173 non-management positions in order to meet our existing budget before these cuts. My 2% reduction rate is still within my Main Estimates. It’s part of the 11 billion that we presented to you today. It was set aside to manage expectations. Once the decision is made, this money will likely be sent back to the centre to contribute to the reductions.
The Chair: That means that the $210 million is 2% of the total —
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: For me, it’s $69 million —
The Chair: It’s for three consecutive years; that is why I say $69 million.
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: Exactly. Of course, 2% of $69 million, if you do the calculation from last year’s Main Estimates, doesn’t really come close. Every year, in my Main Estimates, I have a lot of funding on a temporary basis. If I remember correctly, $8 billion was removed from the calculation. That is how we reached $69 million.
All our special projects, such as specific claims, are not included in that reduction.
The Chair: I see that you have good negotiating skills, even with the Department of Finance.
Ms. Nadeau-Beaulieu: We do what we can.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
This brings us to the end of the meeting. I will ask the senators to stay here so that we can move to an in camera session in about two to three minutes.
There are a few commitments that we will provide to you in writing to confirm them. You will have about 10 days to respond; I believe that is reasonable. Thank you very much.
(The committee continued in camera.)