Topic: CBSA arming

[Slim]

Border guards call for armed patrol
By MICHAEL DEN TANDT

Tuesday, March 22, 2005 Updated at 1:10 AM EST

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050322.wborders22/BNStory/National/

Ottawa â ” The union representing Canada's border guards is urging the federal government to establish an armed border patrol to fill what it says are egregious security gaps at hundreds of unguarded Canada-U.S. border crossings.

In a speech to be delivered before the Commons justice committee Tuesday, Ron Moran, head of the 10,500-member Customs Excise Union, chastises Public Security Minister Anne McLellan for understating the frequency with which vehicles drive through border crossings without first passing through customs.

Last month, Ms. McLellan told a Commons subcommittee that Quebec's Lacolle border crossing â ” the largest in Quebec, with 15 full-time customs officers â ” had seen only 18 drivers "blow through" the border in a single year, Mr. Moran notes.

"In reality," the union leader says in the prepared text for today's speech, "our members counted no less than 17 vehicles during a three-week period in the month of December alone."

Mr. Moran adds that such incidents are common at border posts across Canada. During the week of Feb. 7 in British Columbia, customs officers at five crossings registered 26 illegal crossings, he says in the speech.

And in Stanstead, Que., customs officers typically count 250 "unidentified vehicles" entering Canada each month using two unguarded roads nearby. "We're also aware that CBSA [Canada Border Services Agency] has over 1,600 vehicles documented as entering Canada in 2004 and failing to report to customs."

In an interview yesterday, Mr. Moran said the statistics, particularly at well-staffed crossings such as Lacolle, speak to "flagrant disrespect for any form of authority that exists at the border."

Canadian customs officers are not armed. Nor are they allowed to pursue vehicles that "run" border posts. That duty falls to local police forces, many of whom are strapped for resources and unable to respond in time to catch border runners, Mr. Moran said.

The best way to plug the gaps, he said, would be to establish an armed border patrol, mandated to patrol "unofficial" border crossings, of which there are more than 200 across Canada. Existing customs offices at official ports of entry would serve as bases.

He estimated the job could be done by 250 officers. Assuming an average salary of $50,000, plus benefits, the additional officers would cost taxpayers about $15-million a year, plus the cost of vehicles and equipment.

A spokesman for Ms. McLellan immediately dismissed the idea, saying that, although Ottawa is plowing hundreds of millions of dollars into beefing up the border, "there's no plan to set up an armed Canadian border patrol."

Spokesman Alex Swann said that the government has sharply expanded the number of RCMP-led International Border Enforcement Teams, from four teams in 2001 to 15 currently. Four of these operate in Quebec, where border security is a particularly sensitive issue, both because of the large numbers of unguarded crossings and because nine of the province's RCMP border detachments were closed last year because of budget cuts.

The customs union, for its part, argues that the RCMP teams are primarily investigative in nature, and are no substitute for boots on the ground along the border.

The union has taken its campaign to opposition MPs, and is urging border communities, provinces and U.S. states that skirt the border to take up the issue with the federal government. The RCMP declined comment yesterday.

[Infanteer]

I never understood why our border guys, who are rightfully tagged as "Gate Guards", have never been armed.  They are, after all, a forward defence of Canadian sovereignty.

[Slim]

I never understood why our border guys, who are rightfully tagged as "Gate Guards", have never been armed.   They are, after all, a forward defence of Canadian sovereignty.

Seems to me its some kind of "Canadian " thing...You know, guns are bad so, of course, we can't actually have people CARRYING them, now can we!?

That would completely go against all that our politicians and public have come to believe about our pleasant little frozen banana republic.

We're not actually allowed to STOP criminals (or anyone else) from entering this country now are we?!

(sorry, a bit bitter tonight )

Slim

[dutchie]

In reality Canada won't arm their Customs Officers, or 'Border Services Officers - Customs' as they're now known, until one or more are gunned down, blown up, run over, or beaten to a pulp. Our Government, and by extension the public, never seem to do anything until people are killed, never mind that EVERY Customs Officer I've seen from other countries has been armed, and usually quite well.

[Che]

What strikes me as actually quite frightening is that there were what? 27 Blow throughs at one place and 250 unauthorized crossings a month!

And it's talked about like it's completely ordinary happenings.

Let's assume (possibly very incorrectly) that the majority of them are 20 year old kids freaking out about the doobie rolled in the glove compartment, that still probably leaves a sizable minority who are blowing by with God knows what stashed in their trunk (bodies, explosives, guns, mexican children, deserters, monkeys infected with the bubonic plague)

And To be truthful I always assumed we had armed border guards, it's only common sense!!!!

until one or more are gunned down, blown up, run over, or beaten to a pulp.

Canada is extremely good at putting the buckets out after the rain storm aren't we?

[Torlyn]

And To be truthful I always assumed we had armed border guards, it's only common sense!!!!

Seems kind of odd, doesn't it?  I guess they guard the border by shaking their fingers sternly as cars that go whizzing by.  The border guards wish they were armed like their American counterparts as well.  I'm surprised there hasn't been more of a public debate about this from the union, I know in Calgary every 2 years it seems, our transit cop union starts the media drive to arm the T-Cops.

I mean, how much faith can we possibly have in a system where those that are charged with protecting the security and sovereignty of our nation are less prepared than a Brinks truck driver?  Something's not right...  Way to go, Anne.  BRILLIANT work.   

T

[dutchie]

Unarmed Customs Officers reminds me of Apu (sp?) in the Simpson's.

Said with a heavy Indo-Canadian accent: "I've kindly asked you to stop at my Border Crossing. You've left me no choice but to....kindly ask you again."

[badpup]

Customs officers have for many years asked the Feds for the ability to carry and use weapons, much the same as game wardens have also asked for sidearms, the PC climate in this country wins out every time, and they are disallowed.
We won't learn until one dies

[OCdt.Banks]

I always though our border guards had sidearms at lest, or like the RCMP, having say a shotgun of a rifle in the trunk for "Special" ocasions. Would conservatives give our suys guns? Anyways its time for a change, although I do consider myself more liberal in certain area's (Health care...yeah thats pretty much it) we need a change, and hopefully another increse into our budget!!
UBIQUE!!!

[Gunner]

I never understood why our border guys, who are rightfully tagged as "Gate Guards", have never been armed.  They are, after all, a forward defence of Canadian sovereignty.

Customs agents?  What's next?  Commissionaires!  In all seriousness I have to agree with the general sentiment being made that our border agents (and wildlife officers) should be armed.

[dutchie]

Now that we agree that Customs Officers should be armed, I thought I'd bring up what I see as the biggest legitimate stumbling block to arming them.

Customs Officers are Unionized, of course, and are part of the mega-Federal PSAC Union. When hired, the requirements of the job are put in a 'Statement of Qualifications' (duh), and each factor or sub-factor must be evaluated in the candidate prior to being hired. The willingness to carry and/or use firearms is not part of the Statement of Qual's, and so you have people that are Customs Officers who never intended to carry weapons. Worse still, the recruiters didn't consider their suitability for this either, so you have a lot of people who don't want to carry weapons, don't have the mental capacity to use them, and were never intended to carry them.

What do you do? Fire or forcibly transfer all those that don't want to carry weapons? The Union would loose their mind and fight it, and IMHO would win. Do you start hiring people with the new requirement and only arm them? That would put those that are unarmed at huge risk (bad guys would assume they're all armed).

I don't pretend to have the answers, but I feel that's the biggest problem.

[Gunner]

I think you may find that the union supports their members having weapons.  Certainly that is true of the wildlife officers.

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Caesar,
There normally is a "grandfather" clause brought in when a momentous change like that takes place. Just recently the Govt wanted everyone in Ont. corrections to be "escort"[no jokes] trained but had to "grandfather" those who were allready serving and did not want to be thus trained. Not to mention one part of the course is getting pepper sprayed, so that you can know the effects of what you are doing to someone, and not everyone is medically able to have this done to them.. However that can be made part of new hiring criteria.
Bruce

[dutchie]

Caesar,
There normally is a "grandfather" clause brought in when a momentous change like that takes place. Just recently the Govt wanted everyone in Ont. corrections to be "escort"[no jokes] trained but had to "grandfather" those who were allready serving and did not want to be thus trained. Not to mention one part of the course is getting pepper sprayed, so that you can know the effects of what you are doing to someone, and not everyone is medically able to have this done to them.. However that can be made part of new hiring criteria.
Bruce

Right, but what do you get? Some Customs Officers who are armed, some who are not. I think that would create a very unsafe environment for the unarmed Officers.

Obviously I support arming them, I'm just pointing out there are problems inherant in doing that.

[SteveB]

As someone who encounters Canadian customs on an almost daily basis, I have to vote against arming them.  These people are about as far from a tactical mindset as you can get.  They are much more tax collectors than law enforcement officers.  The porous nature of the border is a travesty but customs as they currently exist are not really able to take a truly pro-active approach to those who aren't already in the mood to comply.  Rather, I would like to see either 1. An increase in the RCMP teams mentioned. or 2. The creation of a separate armed group under the auspices of Customs or CSIS or the RCMP.

I'd hate to see yet another bureaucracy but customs officers as a group are absolutely unprepared for the responsibility and consequences of armed response.

Steve

[Highland Lad]

Hey Steve - Good to see ya here...

OK, I agree that many Canadian Border Security Agency types have a less than intimidating look about them, and some of them are definitely of the "customs, not security" attitude, but this is not true of all.

I think that having a team dedicated to armed patrols of our borders, esp along high-risk sections, like parts of Quebec or BC (rememberthe guys w/ 100 lb rucks of BC bud going over to US through the woods?) would be a good idea.

Arm every CBSA Inspector? No. Create a specialized team for specific locations or areas? YES. Our national security should not be the joke it seems to be (remember the deal with a border crossing in AB? One building for both nations' customs teams - but the bathroom was on the Cdn side - and legally, the US Customs dudes had to check their sidearms if they ever had to take a leak, as they are legally forbidden from carrying them into Canada).

My 2 ¢,
Sig.

[Infanteer]

Seems like a fairly reasonable option - take the "London Metro" approach.   It could be an "armed assignment" that some could volunteer for; give'm MP-5's and black tactical gear and watch recruiting rise for the Customs Agency.

[Highland Lad]

From Wed's Globe & Mail -

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050323/BORDER23/TPNational/TopStories

Porous border causes concern

By BILL CURRY

Wednesday, March 23, 2005 Page A9
 
 OTTAWA -- The president of the RCMP's unofficial union backed up allegations from customs workers yesterday of major gaps in Canada's border security, as a parliamentary committee was warned of a security "crisis" that allows hundreds of vehicles to illegally zip across the border without consequence.

The committee was told that the RCMP shutting down nine posts in Quebec will further compromise security, forcing U.S. agents to pick up the slack.

The warnings came from Ron Moran, president of the Customs Excise Union, and Staff Sergeant Gaetan Delisle, president of the RCMP members association, which operates as a union but is not legally recognized.

At issue is the closing of nine RCMP detachments along the Canada-U.S. border in Quebec and what the two groups describe as a lack of resources at the border. Faced with outcries from affected communities, the Commons justice committee studied the detachment closings and issued a report in December calling for them not to go ahead.

In spite of the report, Mr. Moran said, he was surprised to see the RCMP proceed with the closings, especially in light of pledges to improve border security after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the U.S.

"We were quite stunned," he told MPs. "If anything, we should have expected the opening of RCMP offices along the border in many parts of the country, not closures."

Mr. Moran said his organization is aware the Canada Border Services Agency had documented 1,600 vehicles entering Canada in 2004 and failing to report to customs.

His own organization recorded that 17 vehicles had "blown" the Lacolle border post, a major crossing in Quebec, over a three-week period in 2004.

Staff Sgt. Delisle offered similar criticism before the committee and told reporters after the meeting the RCMP is not able to respond to calls from customs.

"We don't have the numbers, but there's a lot of the criminal elements that are going across the border, specifically on the grow-ops. We know that for a fact," said Staff Sgt. Delisle, a staff relations officer in Montreal who expressed concern about reprisal for contradicting the Commissioner in public.

RCMP Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli dismissed all border- security concerns, defending the closings as part of a countrywide plan to create a more mobile team of officers protecting the border.

Commissioner Zaccardelli said it is impossible to check every vehicle crossing the border, adding the RCMP uses intelligence to focus its resources where there is higher risk.

He said the RCMP's budget has grown from $2-billion to $3-billion over the past six years and its new approach to border security is attracting positive international attention.

"The detachments that we're talking about, their work was not 100 per cent on the border," he told MPs. "We didn't have people located strategically throughout the country to respond. We now have that. . . . What I did is redeploy those positions in Quebec in more strategic locations. I've put them in bigger groups, I gave them more equipment and they're better able to respond in Quebec and also in the rest of the country."

Conservative MP Peter MacKay challenged Commissioner Zaccardelli to explain how fewer detachments will improve border security.

"We are abdicating our responsibility at the border," said Mr. MacKay, referring to the earlier testimony from the two employee groups. "All of this amounts to less ability for front-line officers to do their jobs to protect Canadian citizens. I'm just astounded as to how you can justify this and say security has actually improved."

Liberal MP Denis Paradis also questioned the closings, saying less RCMP visibility could encourage criminals to become more active.

"There are not a lot of people who understand what you are doing," he said. "If the police aren't there on the ground, if they're never seen, doesn't that just open the door wide to anyone who wants to commit a crime? If you never see the police on the highway, don't you think everybody might just speed a little bit?"

-----------

So, if the RCMP is closing these posts, who will do the job?

[George Wallace]

Seems like a fairly reasonable option - take the "London Metro" approach.   It could be an "armed assignment" that some could volunteer for; give'm MP-5's and black tactical gear and watch recruiting rise for the Customs Agency.

You just twigged my interest.   

[Highland Lad]

I'm writing the CIT2a (Customs Inspector Test) with the next block for the St Lawrence District...

Yes, I'd be interested in this kind of position... wouldn't most of you?

[dutchie]

BTW, Customs has only recently added a physical component to the Statement of Qualifications. That is, they only recently started requiring their candidates to pass a basic level of fitness. Recently (about a year ago?) they started training their recruits in take-downs and such. This is NEW.

Gives you an idea into the mentality of the average Customs Officer. There are exceptions of course (don't we have a Customs Officer here? 48th Highlander I believe?), but Customs Officers are civil servants and memebrs of PSAC.

I totally support creating a seperate wing of CBSA that is armed and more aggressive. It could help in chasing down border runners and providing security to the Customs Officers, amonsgt other more obvious duties. Same goes for the Marine Boarding Party Customs Officers. Arm those guys as well. You could arm them very well with smg's and assualt rifles, as they aren't doing the day-to-day Customs work.

I'm writing the CIT2a (Customs Inspector Test) with the next block for the St Lawrence District...

Yes, I'd be interested in this kind of position... wouldn't most of you?

As am I (in BC), and yes, that would be nice.

[badpup]

In response to above:
I (last year) looked at the requirements for working with Canada Customs, at that time part of the requirements/potential training required weapons, 2 months later, when I looked again at the program, the weapons had been removed. COME ON Canada!, these are our first line defence in a peace time situation!, how many more Terrorists do we have to allow to occupy "OUR SPACE"

[Hatchet Man]

Portcullis Guy is a Customs Officer, I am sure he would be to clarify any questions regarding weapons training, requirements.  He has spoken about it before in the mess but I don't remember all the details.  You should probably direct your question to him.

[WR]

For Immediate release                                            January 10, 2006 – 10 a.m.

Independent Report Confirms Customs Officers Must be Armed and Recommends Independent Investigation of CBSA Conduct

MONTREAL – The Customs Excise Union Douanes Accise (CEUDA) has provided copies of ‘A View from the Front Lines’ authored by The Northgate Group to the Leaders of all political parties as well as to the Minister of Public Security and the President of the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA). Among other important recommendations, the Northgate Report has specifically recommended the issuance of side-arms for Border Services Officers, Customs Investigators and Regional Intelligence Officers engaged in inspection, interdiction and enforcement duties. The Report also recommends the creation of an armed, mobile Border Patrol.
The Report was commissioned by CEUDA in July 2005 requesting that an extensive study be conducted to asses whether the risks inherent in the duties of Border Services Officers, Regional Intelligence Officers and Customs Investigators would justify the issuance of side-arms. The Northgate Study was centered on extensive interviews of Front Line Officers in all regions of the country, and included an exhaustive review of relevant documents and of third party materials. 
The Northgate Report was undertaken as the result of a continuing refusal by the federal government to provide side-arms to officers notwithstanding the dramatic enforcement-focused evolution of officer duties at this country’s points-of-entry as well as inland. This evolution was accentuated in July 2000 when Front-Line Customs Officers became empowered to enforce the Criminal Code which includes arresting dangerous and violent persons, drunk drivers and criminal fugitives many of whom are considered by police to be ‘Armed and Dangerous’. Unlike their police counterparts however, Customs Officers were denied side-arms. In 2002, subsequent to Officer pressure, the government contracted ModuSpec to carry out a limited risk analysis on occupational health and safety issues in Customs which resulted in a 70-page report that had a mere 2 pages dedicated to the complicated question of side-arms. 
After evidence was uncovered and later confirmed by a parliamentary committee that the ModuSpec Report had in fact been altered on the issue of side-arms (ModuSpec’s initial conclusions were that an armed presence was warranted at least at the 6 biggest border crossings) and a steadfast refusal by CBSA to conduct a proper study, CEUDA resolved to ensure Front Line Officers were heard and that everyone was provided with an objective and accurate analysis into this important subject. The Study took place over the last 6 months and CEUDA is pleased to make the report public guaranteeing it is unaltered.
The Northgate Report makes 31 recommendations, highlighted by recommendations to: 
   Arm Customs Officers
   Arm Regional Customs Intelligence Officers
   Arm Customs Investigators
   Create an Armed Border Patrol
   End work alone circumstances 

During the course of the study, Northgate also uncovered evidence pertaining to the conduct of the CBSA, suggesting serious public safety and security deficiencies as well as actions that indicate a deliberate intent to mislead the public on many of these shortfalls as well as on the issue of the need for side-arms.


Evidence uncovered and reported in the Northgate Report relating to Customs Service conduct includes:
   Further confirmation that the ModuSpec report had been altered by removing the recommendation for an armed presence at the border;
   Suppression of three separate reports (2 from CCRA and 1 from Audit Canada) recommending the arming of Customs Officers;
   Withholding relevant reports from HRSDC Labour Officers who were investigating work refusals by Customs Officers;
   Providing inaccurate information to Parliamentarians in Committee; and
   Ordering the destruction of a report which compiled threats and harm to Customs Officers without authority or justification for doing so.
In response to this disturbing evidence and the public ramifications of it, the Customs Excise Union Douanes Accise has taken the extraordinary step of asking the Auditor General of Canada to conduct an institutional and operational audit of CBSA actions on these matters.



The results of this Northgate study will be difficult for the Lieberals to suppress and alter, as they have done in the past.

[Slim]

More and more it is beginning to look as though they may not be around to suppress anything after this coming election.