Bill C-3 explained in plain English
An Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
Federal Parliament bill summary, status, timeline, sponsor, votes, and official sources.
At a glance
Official Parliament of Canada snapshot for 43rd Parliament, 1st Session. MP vote breakdowns appear when the House of Commons publishes a recorded division export for that bill. Senate and House stage details include official debate/sitting links when LEGISinfo publishes them.
Our plain-language take, written for civic education.
Source: By PoliticalData.ca
Bill C-3 renames the RCMP's civilian complaint body and gives it new powers to review and investigate complaints about the Canada Border Services Agency.
Bill C-3 makes changes to how the federal government handles complaints about the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA). The bill renames the "Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police" to the "Public Complaints and Review Commission." This renamed Commission will now handle complaints about both the RCMP and the CBSA. The bill gives the Commission new powers regarding the CBSA. The Commission can now: - Review CBSA activities to ensure they follow the law and agency policies - Investigate complaints about CBSA officers and employees - Conduct public hearings into complaints - Make findings and recommendations The bill also sets rules for how CBSA can contract with provinces to detain people. Before entering such agreements, the Minister must be satisfied that the province has an independent person or body to receive complaints about detention treatment and conditions. In urgent situations, an agreement can be made without this requirement, but only with the Minister's approval. The Commission must share information with the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency when complaints involve national security issues. The Commission can also share relevant information between RCMP and CBSA investigations in certain circumstances. The bill also makes related changes to many other federal laws to update references from the old Commission name to the new one, including the Access to Information Act, Privacy Act, Financial Administration Act, and others. The bill does not specify when it comes into force—this will be decided by order of the Governor in Council at a later date.
- Renames the 'Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police' to the 'Public Complaints and Review Commission'
- Gives the Commission authority to review Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) activities for compliance with law, ministerial directions, and agency policies
- Gives the Commission authority to investigate complaints about CBSA officers and employees
- Establishes a complaint process for individuals regarding CBSA officer and employee conduct, including informal resolution and formal investigation options
- Allows the Commission to conduct public hearings into CBSA complaints with certain in-camera exceptions for sensitive information
- Allows complaints to be made to the Commission or CBSA itself, with a 60-day referral period if the complainant is dissatisfied with CBSA's handling
- Requires the Commission to make public summaries of review reports and hearing findings
- Requires the Commission to publish annual reports to Parliament on CBSA complaints and serious incidents
- Restricts CBSA from entering into provincial detention agreements unless the province has an independent complaint mechanism, except in urgent situations with ministerial approval
- Allows information sharing between RCMP and CBSA investigations when events involve both agencies
- Requires CBSA to notify the Commission of serious incidents (deaths or serious injuries resulting from officer/employee actions, or offences the Minister deems in the public interest to investigate)
- Gives the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency authority to investigate complaints involving national security related to CBSA
- Updates references in multiple federal statutes (Access to Information Act, Privacy Act, Financial Administration Act, Security of Information Act, Canada Evidence Act, Public Sector Compensation Act, National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act, National Security and Intelligence Review Agency Act, and Avoiding Complicity in Mistreatment by Foreign Entities Act) to use the new Commission name
- Creates offences for failing to comply with Commission summonses, harassing complainants or witnesses, obstructing investigations, or destroying relevant documents, with penalties up to 5 years imprisonment
- Individuals who are arrested, detained, or interact with CBSA officers or employees and wish to make complaints about their conduct
- Individuals detained on behalf of CBSA under provincial agreements who want to complain about their treatment or detention conditions
- CBSA officers and employees whose conduct may be subject to complaints or investigations
- The Public Complaints and Review Commission (renamed from Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP), which now has expanded jurisdiction over CBSA
- Provincial governments entering into detention agreements with CBSA, which must now have independent complaint mechanisms in place
- The RCMP, which continues under the Commission's oversight with modified procedures
- The Canada Border Services Agency and its President, who now face Commission review and investigation authority
- The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, who oversees both the RCMP and CBSA
- The National Security and Intelligence Review Agency, which gains authority over CBSA national security complaints
- Witnesses who may be summoned by the Commission to provide evidence
- Parliament, which receives annual reports on Commission activities related to both RCMP and CBSA
- Individuals have the right to make complaints about CBSA officer or employee conduct to the Commission or directly to CBSA
- Individuals detained by CBSA must be informed of their right to complain and how to make a complaint, as soon as feasible
- Individuals detained on behalf of CBSA under provincial agreements must be informed of their right to complain to provincial authorities about their treatment and detention conditions
- The Commission must jointly establish service standards with CBSA for complaint timelines and must publish standards related to complainant communications
- The Commission must make public summaries of review reports and hearing findings (with 15-day delay after providing summaries to the Minister and President)
- The Commission must give the CBSA President an opportunity to comment on findings before publishing summaries
- The Commission must provide annual reports to Parliament detailing CBSA complaints, serious incidents, and performance against service standards
- The Commission must conduct investigations or hearings in public unless national security, law enforcement, personal affairs, or other sensitive circumstances warrant in-camera proceedings
- CBSA must establish joint service standards with the Commission for complaint handling timelines
- CBSA must notify the Commission of serious incidents as soon as feasible after becoming aware of them
- CBSA must notify police forces with jurisdiction of serious incidents
- CBSA must provide the Commission with information about complaints made to provincial authorities regarding detention treatment and conditions under provincial agreements
- CBSA must provide the Commission with copies of provincial monitoring reports containing findings or recommendations
- Provincial governments can only enter into detention agreements with CBSA if they have an independent complaint mechanism in place (unless urgent circumstances exist with ministerial approval)
- CBSA cannot enter into or continue detention agreements with provinces lacking independent complaint mechanisms, except in urgent situations with ministerial approval
- The Commission must establish and maintain records of all complaints
- The Commission has the power to summon witnesses and compel evidence, similar to superior court powers
- Witnesses summoned by the Commission cannot refuse to answer on grounds of self-incrimination, but evidence can only be used in limited circumstances
- Persons acting on the Commission's behalf have immunity from criminal, civil, or administrative action for anything done in good faith in exercise of their duties
- Commission members, officers, and employees are protected from being compelled to testify about matters learned through their duties, except in criminal prosecutions or breaches of the Security of Information Act
- Information disclosed to the Commission maintains protection if subject to solicitor-client privilege or litigation privilege
- The Commission can share relevant information with RCMP investigations involving shared events with both agencies present
- Information obtained by the Commission may only be used for the purposes authorized under the bill and cannot be disclosed without Chairperson approval and safeguards
- The bill does not specify a date when it comes into force. The bill states: 'The provisions of this Act come into force on a day or days to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.' This means the Government will decide the commencement date through an order after the bill is passed.
- Failure to attend when summoned as a witness: summary conviction offence, fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months, or both
- Refusal to take oath, produce documents, or answer questions when summoned: summary conviction offence, fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months, or both
- Insulting or threatening language or causing interference/disturbance during proceedings: summary conviction offence, fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months, or both
- Publishing observations or words intended to dissuade witnesses: summary conviction offence, fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months, or both
- Harassing, intimidating, or threatening anyone to prevent complaint-making: indictable offence up to 5 years imprisonment, or summary conviction fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months, or both
- Harassing, intimidating, or threatening complainants, witnesses, or those performing duties: indictable offence up to 5 years imprisonment, or summary conviction fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months, or both
- Wilfully obstructing Commission work or making false/misleading statements: indictable offence up to 5 years imprisonment, or summary conviction fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months, or both
- Destroying, mutilating, altering, falsifying, or concealing documents relevant to investigations or hearings: indictable offence up to 5 years imprisonment, or summary conviction fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months, or both
- Directing, counselling, or proposing that others commit offences under the bill: indictable offence up to 5 years imprisonment, or summary conviction fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months, or both
- Disclosing confidential information obtained by the Commission without authorization: summary conviction offence, fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months, or both (defence available if person exercised due diligence)
- Summary conviction proceedings must be instituted within 2 years of when the subject matter arose
- The bill does not specify the exact date the changes take effect—this will be determined by future Governor in Council order
- The scope of 'serious injury' is not defined in the bill; instead, it will be defined by future Governor in Council regulations
- The bill allows for regulations to be made on multiple matters (service standards, use of information, informal resolution categories, witness fees, complaint withdrawal procedures, representations, joint reviews, offences) but does not specify what these regulations will contain
- The bill states the Commission must 'take the steps that it considers necessary' to protect confidential information in reports but does not prescribe specific redaction standards
- The bill does not specify how the Commission will determine whether conducting a review 'on its own initiative' would compromise the handling of complaints
- The process for determining whether provincial detention agreements have 'independent' complaint mechanisms is not defined in the bill
- The bill does not specify timelines for CBSA to notify the Commission of serious incidents, only that it must be 'as soon as feasible'
- The definition of 'similar activity' for purposes of sharing information between RCMP and CBSA investigations is not provided
- The bill does not specify how the Commission will manage potential conflicts between its RCMP and CBSA mandates
- The bill refers to regulations respecting 'measures' that CBSA must take to protect information but does not specify what these measures should include
- The role and interaction between the Commission and provincial complaint bodies in joint reviews is addressed only in principle; specifics will be in future regulations
The Commission definition is changed to refer to the 'Public Complaints and Review Commission' instead of the 'Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police'. Part VI heading is changed accordingly. The Commission structure is adjusted to consist of a Chairperson, Vice-chairperson, and up to three other members. New rules are added requiring public summaries of review reports, requiring the Commissioner to have an opportunity to comment before summaries are published, and requiring joint service standards with the RCMP for complaint timelines. The Commission gains authority to share information with CBSA investigations when shared events involve both RCMP members and CBSA officers/employees.
Source: Clauses 1-10
A new Part 2 is added establishing the Public Complaints and Review Commission's powers over CBSA. The Commission can review CBSA activities for compliance with law and policy, investigate complaints about CBSA officers and employees, conduct public hearings, and make findings and recommendations. A complaints process is established allowing individuals to complain about CBSA officer/employee conduct. Procedures include informal resolution options, formal investigation by CBSA, and Commission review if complainants are dissatisfied. The Commission must establish joint service standards with CBSA for complaint handling timelines. CBSA must notify the Commission of serious incidents. National security complaints are referred to the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency. New restrictions are placed on CBSA detention agreements with provinces, requiring independent provincial complaint mechanisms unless urgent. Information sharing rules are established between CBSA and RCMP investigations involving both agencies.
Source: Clauses 12-15
Schedule I is updated to remove the old Commission name and add the new 'Public Complaints and Review Commission' name under 'Other Government Institutions'
Source: Clauses 16-17
Item 22 of the schedule is updated to reference the Public Complaints and Review Commission and to specify its authority relates to both the RCMP Act and CBSA Act, rather than just the RCMP Act
Source: Clause 18
Schedules I.1, IV, and VI are updated to replace references to the old Commission name with the new 'Public Complaints and Review Commission', maintaining the reference to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and the Chairperson as the designated authority
Source: Clauses 19-24
The schedule is updated to replace the old Commission name with the new 'Public Complaints and Review Commission'
Source: Clauses 25-26
The schedule is updated to remove the old Commission name and add the new 'Public Complaints and Review Commission' under 'Other Government Institutions'
Source: Clauses 27-28
Schedule I is updated to remove the old Commission name and add the new 'Public Complaints and Review Commission' under 'Other Portions of the Public Service'
Source: Clauses 29-30
References to the Commission are updated from the old name to the new 'Public Complaints and Review Commission'. The Committee is authorized to provide information to the Commission related to CBSA in addition to RCMP matters.
Source: Clauses 31-33
The definition of 'deputy head' is expanded to include the President of CBSA for purposes of the Act. The definition of 'review body' is updated to reference the new Commission name. The Review Agency's mandate is expanded to include investigating complaints referred under the CBSA Act. The Review Agency gains access to Commission information related to CBSA complaints. The Review Agency can provide information to the Commission related to both RCMP and CBSA activities. The Review Agency must report on CBSA complaints as well as RCMP complaints.
Source: Clauses 34-39
References are updated from the old Commission name to the new 'Public Complaints and Review Commission' where applicable. Deputy heads must provide copies of directions and reports to the Commission when applicable.
Source: Clauses 40-41
Generated using AI from official bill text. Not legal advice. It is written by PoliticalData.ca for civic education, automatically checked and spot-reviewed before publishing.
Official textThe official summary published alongside the bill, shown exactly as written.
Source: Parliament of Canada (LEGISinfo)
A legislative summary is currently being prepared for this bill by the Parliamentary Information and Research Service of the Library of Parliament. Meanwhile, the following executive summary is available. On 27 January 2020, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness introduced Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Bill C-3 amends the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act to, among other things, rename the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police as the Public Complaints and Review Commission. It also amends the Canada Border Services Agency Act to, among other things, grant to that Commission powers, duties and functions in relation to the Canada Border Services Agency, including the power to conduct a review of the activities of that Agency and to investigate complaints concerning the conduct of any of that Agency’s officers or employees. It also makes consequential amendments to other Acts.
This is the official summary published by the Parliament of Canada, shown verbatim. Not legal advice. PoliticalData.ca did not write or edit this text.
View on LEGISinfoParliamentary Process
We don't have a plain-language summary for First reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Second reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Third reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
Bill C-3 completed its First Reading in the House of Commons on January 27, 2020, and subsequently proceeded to Second Reading where debates took place.
This artifact summarizes the procedural steps for Bill C-3 in the House of Commons. The bill was introduced at First Reading on January 27, 2020, and moved to Second Reading on January 29, 2020. Debates at Second Reading occurred on February 6, February 7, and February 21, 2020. The artifact also notes that a similar bill, C-98, was introduced in a previous Parliament.
On January 27, 2020, Bill C-3 was introduced and read for the first time in the House of Commons, followed by continued debate on the Speech from the Throne.
On January 27, 2020, the House of Commons met. The primary procedural business of the day was the introduction of Bill C-3, an Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act. The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness moved for leave to introduce the bill, and the motion was deemed adopted. This meant the bill was read for the first time and ordered to be printed. The rest of the sitting consisted of debate on the Speech from the Throne, oral question period, and the tabling of various reports and petitions.
Bill C-3 is at the second reading stage in the House of Commons, with debates and speeches having taken place in late January and February 2020.
The House of Commons is currently at the second reading stage for Bill C-3. The latest activity noted was a debate on Friday, February 21, 2020. The bill had its first reading on Monday, January 27, 2020, and the second reading debate began on Wednesday, January 29, 2020. Several major speeches related to the second reading occurred on February 6, 7, and 21, 2020, with response speeches also given on January 29, 2020.
The House of Commons debated Bill C-3 at second reading, discussed various topical issues during oral question period, and addressed procedural matters and petitions during a sitting on January 29, 2020.
This document is a record of a sitting of the House of Commons on January 29, 2020. The sitting included statements by members on various topics, oral question period where members questioned the Prime Minister on issues such as finance, natural resources, public safety, and international trade, and government orders where Bill C-3 (An Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act) was debated at second reading. The sitting also included business of supply, a point of privilege regarding voting procedures, routine proceedings including the tabling of reports and petitions, and adjournment proceedings. The debate on Bill C-3 involved extensive discussion about establishing an independent review and complaints mechanism for the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA).
During the second reading debate of Bill C-3, the government introduced legislation to create an independent review body for complaints against the Canada Border Services Agency, aiming to increase accountability and public trust.
During the second reading debate for Bill C-3, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Bill Blair, introduced the bill. He explained that Bill C-3 would establish an independent review and complaints mechanism for the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA). This would address a gap in accountability, as the CBSA is the only public safety agency in Canada without its own independent review body. The proposed legislation would expand the responsibilities of the existing Civilian Review and Complaints Commission (CRCC) for the RCMP to include the CBSA, renaming it the Public Complaints and Review Commission (PCRC). The PCRC would handle public complaints about CBSA employee conduct and service, and could also initiate its own reviews of CBSA activities. Several members from different parties spoke, raising concerns about consultation with unions, the effectiveness of the proposed oversight, the potential for backlogs, and the scope of the review, particularly regarding detention facilities and national security activities. The debate indicated that while there is general support for establishing an oversight body, there are questions about the specifics of its implementation.
During a House of Commons debate on Bill C-3, members discussed the proposed establishment of an independent oversight body for the Canada Border Services Agency, with general support for the principle but specific concerns raised about its implementation.
This document is a record of a debate in the House of Commons on January 29, 2020, concerning Bill C-3, an act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act. The debate focused on the proposed establishment of an independent review and complaints mechanism for the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA). The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Bill Blair, introduced the bill, highlighting the need for an independent body to handle complaints against CBSA officers, similar to the existing mechanism for the RCMP. He noted that Canada was unique among its allies in not having such oversight for its border agency. Members from various parties, including the Conservative, NDP, and Bloc Québécois, participated in the debate, expressing support for the principle of independent oversight while also raising concerns about the bill's specifics, such as consultation with unions, potential backlogs, and the scope of the commission's powers. The debate touched on the extensive powers held by CBSA officers and the importance of accountability to maintain public trust. Several members shared anecdotes and statistics regarding complaints and incidents involving CBSA officers. The discussion also briefly covered other government business and statements by members on unrelated topics.
During the House of Commons second reading debate on January 29, 2020, Bill C-3 was introduced to establish an independent civilian review body for the Canada Border Services Agency, expanding the mandate of an existing RCMP oversight commission.
On January 29, 2020, during the second reading debate stage in the House of Commons, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Bill Blair, introduced Bill C-3. This bill aims to establish an independent review and complaints mechanism for the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA). The minister explained that currently, complaints about CBSA officers are handled internally, and there is no external body to review them. The proposed legislation would expand the mandate of the existing Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP (CRCC) to include the CBSA, renaming it the Public Complaints and Review Commission (PCRC). This new commission would handle public complaints about CBSA conduct and service, and could also initiate its own reviews of CBSA activities, excluding national security matters. The minister highlighted that this reform addresses a long-standing gap in Canada's accountability framework for public safety institutions and that Canada is an outlier among its allies for not having such a mechanism for its border agency. He mentioned that the bill had received all-party support in the previous Parliament and was being reintroduced at the first opportunity. Members from the Conservative, NDP, and Bloc Québécois parties also spoke during the debate, expressing varying degrees of support and raising concerns about the bill's scope, the consultation process with unions, and the potential for backlog and accountability. The debate on Bill C-3 continued with further discussions among members.
During the second reading debate of Bill C-3, the House of Commons discussed the establishment of an independent review and complaints mechanism for the Canada Border Services Agency, aiming to enhance accountability and public trust.
On January 29, 2020, the House of Commons was debating Bill C-3, an Act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act. The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Bill Blair, introduced the bill, explaining that it would establish an independent review and complaints mechanism for the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA). Currently, complaints about CBSA officers are handled internally, and the bill aims to address this accountability gap. The proposed mechanism would be an expansion of the existing Civilian Review and Complaints Commission (CRCC) for the RCMP, which would be renamed the Public Complaints and Review Commission (PCRC). This PCRC would handle complaints related to both the RCMP and the CBSA. The minister highlighted that Canada is unique among its allies in not having such a dedicated review body for its border agency. Various members from different parties spoke about the bill, raising points about the need for accountability, the proposed powers of the commission, consultation with unions, and the effectiveness of the proposed oversight.
During the second reading debate of the CUSMA Implementation Act, Members of Parliament from multiple parties discussed various provisions of the agreement, including its impact on Canadian industries and the negotiation process.
On February 6, 2020, the House of Commons continued its second reading debate on Bill C-4, the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) Implementation Act. Members from various parties (Bloc Québécois, Conservative, NDP, Liberal, Green) participated in the debate, raising concerns and offering perspectives on different aspects of the agreement. Key themes discussed included the impact on Quebec's industries (aluminum, softwood lumber, supply-managed agriculture), the removal of Chapter 11 (investor-state dispute settlement), the inclusion of environmental and labour provisions, the "Buy American" Act, and the sunset clause. The debate also touched upon the negotiation process and the government's handling of the agreement. Following the debate, the motion to refer Bill C-4 to committee was agreed to.
During a House of Commons debate on Bill C-3, members discussed the importance of establishing an independent review commission for the Canada Border Services Agency to enhance accountability and public trust.
On February 7, 2020, the House of Commons continued its debate on Bill C-3, an act to amend the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act. Members from various parties, including the Liberal, Conservative, and NDP, spoke about the bill. A central theme was the creation of an independent review body for the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) to handle public complaints. Many members expressed support for the bill, highlighting the need for increased accountability and transparency within the CBSA. Some concerns were raised about the bill's implementation, potential bureaucratic expansion, and the funding of the new commission. Other topics discussed during the sitting included issues related to natural resources, gun violence, and the Trans Mountain pipeline, though these were not directly part of the Bill C-3 debate.
During a House of Commons debate on Bill C-3, which proposes civilian oversight for the Canada Border Services Agency, Members of Parliament discussed the bill's provisions alongside the ongoing national protests and the government's response.
During the second reading debate on Bill C-3, Members of Parliament discussed proposed changes to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act and the Canada Border Services Agency Act. A key aspect of the bill is the renaming of the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP to the Public Complaints and Review Commission and granting it powers to review complaints related to the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA). Several members expressed support for the principle of civilian oversight for law enforcement agencies. Much of the debate, however, focused on the ongoing national protests and blockades, with opposition members criticizing the government's handling of the situation and linking it to a lack of accountability. Liberal members defended the government's approach, emphasizing dialogue and peaceful resolution. There was also discussion about the role of the CBSA and RCMP in ensuring border security and law and order.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Consideration in committee yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Report stage yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
We don't have a plain-language summary for Third reading yet. The official source linked below is the full record.
Debate and sitting links point to official parliamentary sources when LEGISinfo publishes them. Any plain-language discussion summaries should be generated from those official texts and reviewed before public display.
Vote Summary
This bill is still active. We only show vote counts after the legislature publishes a recorded division.
No published representative vote breakdown
This bill is still moving through the process. When a recorded division is published, representative positions can be listed here.
Official sources
Status, sponsor, votes, and timeline on this page are drawn from these official legislative sources and public records. Each summary above is attributed to its own source.
How this data is sourced