Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: Honourable senators, as sponsor of Bill S-256, the Canadian postal safety act, I rise to speak to the Legal Committee’s report on the bill. In the eternal words of former Senator Baker, I will be brief.

Thank you to members of the committee for a very collaborative study and amendment process on this bill, leading to the report before us. I am pleased that the report proposes to both simplify and strengthen the bill in response to committee evidence.

Before getting into the amendments, in the big picture, Bill S-256 is a means to respond to an aspect of the opioid epidemic that is killing Canadians across the country. The bill’s purpose is to allow police, with a warrant, to “. . . search, seize, detain or retain Canada Post mail in the course of post . . . .” This will help the police to disrupt the delivery of deadly drugs like fentanyl by Canada Post.

To achieve this, the bill proposes to amend the Canada Post Corporation Act to remove what has become, in my view and the view of many more, an arbitrary and outdated restriction from 1867 that applies only to Canada Post mail.

Subsection 40(3) of that statute contains this restriction, which currently prevents searches and seizures by police, even with a warrant, with exceptions around three other federal statutes: the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act Act, the Customs Act and the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act. But there are no exceptions for statutes like the Criminal Code and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

Accordingly, Bill S-256 aims to treat items in Canada Post mail the same way as the law already treats items sent by private couriers such as FedEx or Purolator, which police can search with a warrant. Indeed, with a warrant police can currently search emails, documents locked in a safe in a person’s home, Canada Post mail before it is sent or after delivery and the like, but not when it is in the mail. Therefore, this change is quite moderate and natural, with similar contexts.

The idea for this bill comes from an article published in Maclean’s on March 7, 2019, entitled “For fentanyl importers, Canada Post is the shipping method of choice.” The article stated that people could buy illegal drugs on the dark web and easily have them delivered by Canada Post.

The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police recommended this bill’s main change in 2015 to provide police with the ability to search items for drugs, with a warrant, while in the course of post. This change should not have taken 10 years, but it is never too late to do the right thing and, hopefully, help save lives.

We should keep in mind that a 30-gram, letter-sized package can contain 15,000 fatal doses of fentanyl.

This change to the Canada Post Act has received support from the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, which represents 63 First Nations in Manitoba, and the Mushkegowuk Council, which represents eight First Nations in northern Ontario.

Why do they support this change? Because Canada Post is the sole entity that delivers parcels in these remote areas, and it’s through Canada Post that the drugs come into the reserves.

The committee heard that the trafficking of drugs to remote communities by mail is a major problem that this bill can help address.

I turn now to the two significant amendments in the report. The effect of one amendment is to make clear that police searches of items in the mail apply only to cases where they obtain a general warrant or its equivalent. This requirement means that the evidentiary standard would be “reasonable grounds to believe” in all cases, as compared to “reasonable grounds to suspect.”

“Reasonable grounds to believe” is the common standard in the Criminal Code and most federal enactments authorizing a search warrant in Canada. It is the higher standard.

General warrants are provided for in section 487.01 of the Criminal Code with their equivalent, for example, in section 11 of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

This amendment responded to the excellent testimony of law professor Steve Coughlan, who is now at Dalhousie University. He is a former student of Senator Cotter — who nods in approval that he was a good student. Professor Coughlan addressed potential privacy concerns with the bill. Senator Simons organized his appearance as a witness.

I am very grateful to our colleagues Senator Simons and Senator Clement for their contributions to this subject. We all have reasonable grounds to believe that these efforts have ensured appropriate protections of privacy. I am also pleased that the amendment and some deletions make the bill much simpler.

The second important change in the bill is an amendment requested through the testimony and the brief from the Mushkegowuk Council. Specifically, their counsel requested that a provision be added to the Canada Post Corporation Act to permit Canada Post to conduct unobtrusive screenings for illegal drugs on all mail bound for a First Nation where it has been authorized to do so in a First Nation law or bylaw.

Crucially, the screening would not include opening or reading mail but may include the use of a scanner, canine detection or a similar non-intrusive device.

As we heard, this preliminary screening already takes place at airports, in courthouses and in mailrooms across Canada. As well, it has also been upheld by courts in the context of baggage searches by First Nations for arriving passengers.

Additionally, in Mushkegowuk communities — eight First Nations in northern Ontario — we heard that in 2023 the rate of fatal overdoses was three times higher than the Ontario average, which is itself a high rate. In 2021, the rate of opioid toxicity-related hospital visits was nine times higher. That is a real problem for these remote communities.

As well, a representative of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs confirmed their support for such an amendment to encourage Canada Post screenings for illegal drugs if authorized by a First Nation.

With such testimony, I believe the Senate has a responsibility to act. Thus, the committee adopted an amendment based on text provided by Mushkegowuk Council’s representatives, with application to any Indigenous body holding section 35 constitutional rights on their own authority to encourage screening by Canada Post inspectors of mail addressed to a location on the relevant authority’s land. This could include a reserve, or Indigenous lands prescribed by regulations made under the Canada Post Corporation Act.

At committee, senators also adopted subamendments to this proposal. These subamendments were from Senators Carignan and Oudar and brought greater precision to the language proposed, consistent with the intent of the Mushkegowuk Council’s proposal.

It is important to understand that the aim of this amendment is to encourage Canada Post and law enforcement to take Indigenous jurisdiction and laws seriously, to respect self-determination and advance reconciliation, including legal reconciliation.

The committee heard that having Indigenous laws enforced can be difficult, including from the comments of Senator McCallum and Senator Prosper. Senator McCallum has also raised these issues with Bill S-271, regarding the RCMP, and Bill S-272, regarding the Director of Public Prosecutions.

This amendment to Bill S-256 before us does not force any Indigenous group or community to adopt laws to authorize screening. It is totally up to them as permissive legislation. However, if these authorities do so because of health and safety concerns, Canada Post will have a moral duty to sit down with them and consider ways to conduct screenings within their inspection process.

Senators, I thank members of the committee again for their most valued and appreciated input. I believe Bill S-256 has some urgency as one piece of a larger collective response to the opioid epidemic.

I ask you, colleagues, to adopt the report and to engage in third reading as soon as possible.

Thank you, meegwetch, wela’lin..

Some Hon. Senators: Hear, hear.