• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Canada/US Border Integrity Thread

And the battle of the unions over who get the biggest piece of the border integrity budget is well underway:



Neither is positioned in the short term to do the job properly. Both have severe staffing, recruitment and retention problems.
 
And the battle of the unions over who get the biggest piece of the border integrity budget is well underway:



Neither is positioned in the short term to do the job properly. Both have severe staffing, recruitment and retention problems.
The RCMP union seems to be leaning in hard on all things federal. I think they see the long term writing on the wall regarding contract policing.

IMO the fact that we have an agency for point of entry and inland, and a separate agency for border patrol between POE, is silly. If federal law enforcement in Canada were a clean slate to be built from scratch, it would not be built that way. The status quo is pure inertia.

Whoever gets it, both organizations are strapped for bodies. Both are competing with every other police service, corrections, CAF, and other public safety sector employers.

I’m also not confident that a holistic, clean slate look has been taken to actually define the totality of our border/immigration challenges in their totality. Any talk of the border has to mesh with looking at IRCC and post-arrival immigration enforcement too.
 
EPS is still aggressively hiring...


You should seriously think on it. It would be our gain. Recruiting would scoop you up.
And you would be assigned to………. Drum role please………. GD (patrol) for your first 5 years. With no chance of getting into Federal, ever.
 
The RCMP union seems to be leaning in hard on all things federal. I think they see the long term writing on the wall regarding contract policing.

IMO the fact that we have an agency for point of entry and inland, and a separate agency for border patrol between POE, is silly. If federal law enforcement in Canada were a clean slate to be built from scratch, it would not be built that way. The status quo is pure inertia.

Whoever gets it, both organizations are strapped for bodies. Both are competing with every other police service, corrections, CAF, and other public safety sector employers.

I’m also not confident that a holistic, clean slate look has been taken to actually define the totality of our border/immigration challenges in their totality. Any talk of the border has to mesh with looking at IRCC and post-arrival immigration enforcement too.
The NPF is covering all the bases, minicipal/provincial-territorial (contract) and federal. Strongly advocating in all jurisdictions to retain the RCMP.

I think the hard part about the role of border integrity between POEs is that it isnt just about border jumpers or illegal drug / gun interdiction within X kms of the border. It is about the larger investigations, intelligence, money laundering, inter-agency and international cooperation. We need CBSA and Federal Policing cooperating at some point. I will suggest that this occur as close to the POEs as possible.
 
The RCMP union seems to be leaning in hard on all things federal. I think they see the long term writing on the wall regarding contract policing.

IMO the fact that we have an agency for point of entry and inland, and a separate agency for border patrol between POE, is silly. If federal law enforcement in Canada were a clean slate to be built from scratch, it would not be built that way. The status quo is pure inertia.

Whoever gets it, both organizations are strapped for bodies. Both are competing with every other police service, corrections, CAF, and other public safety sector employers.

I’m also not confident that a holistic, clean slate look has been taken to actually define the totality of our border/immigration challenges in their totality. Any talk of the border has to mesh with looking at IRCC and post-arrival immigration enforcement too.

Do you want to add in maritime policing and coast guarding to that mix as well?

That would make a clear dividing line between "arresting" forces and "blow them up real good" forces.
 
The NPF is covering all the bases, minicipal/provincial-territorial (contract) and federal. Strongly advocating in all jurisdictions to retain the RCMP.

I think the hard part about the role of border integrity between POEs is that it isnt just about border jumpers or illegal drug / gun interdiction within X kms of the border. It is about the larger investigations, intelligence, money laundering, inter-agency and international cooperation. We need CBSA and Federal Policing cooperating at some point. I will suggest that this occur as close to the POEs as possible.

Return the CBSA to their rubber stamp duties? They originally argued against being armed. They were customs and immigration paper pushers.
 
Do you want to add in maritime policing and coast guarding to that mix as well?

That would make a clear dividing line between "arresting" forces and "blow them up real good" forces.
I don’t know enough about coast guard to have an informed opinion, but probably not.
 
Return the CBSA to their rubber stamp duties? They originally argued against being armed. They were customs and immigration paper pushers.
That's not entirely accurate. The union has been pushing for arming officers since before CBSA came into being (2003) and the government resisted claiming it was not needed while at the same time posting RCMP members at some land POEs and most major airports to provide an armed presence. Hypocrisy at it's best. The Harper government armed CBSA beginning in 2008. The Liberals campaigned on reversing that initiative in the 2010 election. Today, every recruit who graduates from the CBSA College does so as an armed Border Services Officer (BSO).

As for the remainder of your comment, it harkens back to the mindset of former Liberal minister Elinor Caplan who publicly described BSOs as "bank tellers" and insisted that instead of properly equipping and training them they allow armed and dangerous persons encountered at the border to simply pass through and then inform the police of jurisdiction who, in some cases, were several hours away. Today's BSOs are very well trained in use of force and de-escalation and in administering almost 100 different laws and regulations.
 
Last edited:
That's not entirely accurate. The union has been pushing for arming officers since before CBSA came into being (2003) and the government resisted claiming it was not needed while at the same time posting RCMP members at some land POEs and most major airports to provide an armed presence. Hypocrisy at it's best. The Harper government armed CBSA beginning in 2008. The Liberals campaigned on reversing that initiative in the 2010 election. Today, every recruit who graduates from the CBSA College does so as an armed Border Services Officer (BSO).

As for the remainder of your comment, it harkens back to the mindset of former Liberal minister Elinor Caplan who publicly described BSOs as "bank tellers" and insisted that instead of properly equipping and training them they allow armed and dangerous persons encountered at the border to simply pass through and then inform the police of jurisdiction who, in some cases, were several hours away. Today's BSOs are very well trained in use of force and de-escalation and in administering almost 100 different laws and regulations.

Thanks Haggis,

At the time of those events I was forming the impression that there was, at least, a significant cohort within the customs and immigration community that didn't want to be armed. The problem of only knowing what you read in the newspapers?
 
Thanks Haggis,

At the time of those events I was forming the impression that there was, at least, a significant cohort within the customs and immigration community that didn't want to be armed. The problem of only knowing what you read in the newspapers?
Like every organization, there are always a few die-hards who long for "how it used to be". And there were some who resisted the arming initiative. There are still a few unarmed BSOs out there who have been accommodated for a variety of reasons, but their number are quite low. Don't confuse them with the unarmed BSOs you see at airports. They are trained and qualified on firearms but prohibited by Transport Canada regulations from carrying in the terminal areas.
 
But
That's not entirely accurate. The union has been pushing for arming officers since before CBSA came into being (2003) and the government resisted claiming it was not needed while at the same time posting RCMP members at some land POEs and most major airports to provide an armed presence. Hypocrisy at it's best. The Harper government armed CBSA beginning in 2008. The Liberals campaigned on reversing that initiative in the 2010 election. Today, every recruit who graduates from the CBSA College does so as an armed Border Services Officer (BSO).

As for the remainder of your comment, it harkens back to the mindset of former Liberal minister Elinor Caplan who publicly described BSOs as "bank tellers" and insisted that instead of properly equipping and training them they allow armed and dangerous persons encountered at the border to simply pass through and then inform the police of jurisdiction who, in some cases, were several hours away. Today's BSOs are very well trained in use of force and de-escalation and in administering almost 100 different laws and regulations.


With CBSA still using the Beretta Px4 Storm, can you really consider yourselves armed though?

j/k 😉🙂
 
Back
Top