PSAC DISCUSSION PAPER: Security in Government

A great many PSAC members are employed by the government in areas that form part of the security infrastructure of our society. UNDE members employed by National Defence and the Communications Security Establishment, CEUDA members employed as Customs Officers, Environment and UCTE members employed by the Coast Guard, and USGE members employed at Corrections and the RCMP, clearly meet the definition of workers employed in a security capacity. Others, including CEIU members employed as Immigration Officers, National Component members who work in Parks and Commissionaires as well as many others also fit the definition.

The focus of Canadian public policy shifted dramatically immediately following September 11, 2001. Since then, the debate over the role of the government has been focussed more on security than on other governmental functions. In fact, to the extent that other issues are addressed, they are increasingly being tied to security. Discussion during the lead up to the 2001 budget has been focussed on how we, as a society, pay for increased security. Moreover, Parliament has been subsumed in legislation related in large measure to the creation of a new security environment.

There is a tendency when looking at security to focus on aspects related to policing and enforcement, and to short shift other issues that are arguably equally important. To date, we have identified a number of issues that need to be addressed by the PSAC in the context of our security in government work; they can be grouped under security services as well as economic security and protection of human rights.

• Border security (CEUDA);
• Protection of government workers;
• Foreign Affairs (National Component)
• Protection of our air and water ways (UCTE/Environment/UNDE);
• Protection of government buildings and infrastructure (USGE/GSU/UNDE);
• Protection of mail distribution (UPCE);
• Airport and airline security (UCTE);
• Police and intelligence services (USGE/UNDE); and,
• Parks (National Component).

• Protecting human rights;
• Protecting the health of Canadians (NHWU);
• Providing income support (NHWU/CEIU);
• Immigration and refugee issues (CEIU);
• Government spending ; and,
• Foreign Affairs (National Component).

There is obviously a number of ways that each of these separate, but related, issues can be addressed. Airport and airline security can be provided by the State (as it will be under US legislation adopted in November 2001) or the airlines as currently the case in Canada. Moreover, it can be implemented in a way that targets some segments of the population for special scrutiny (racial profiling) or it can be systemically based—matching all bags with passengers, screening checked bags, and the like. It is entirely possible, that important services such as child care, health care and labour adjustment will be undermined in order to facilitate increased spending on security services.

While there is a clear potential that the PSAC can regain some of the members that were lost to the 55,000 person-year employment reduction program of the mid 1990s, and gain members in other areas as a result of the increased government commitment to security, employment and resources in other areas of government may well be cut to pay for the increased security costs, and the revenue loss from the economic fall-out of September 11^th.

Since September 11^th, the choices that the government ultimately makes with regard to security questions will have a pronounced impact on the PSAC and our members. And the indications are that the government is predisposed in many instances to making the wrong choice from the perspective of the PSAC.

Despite cautioning Canadians with regard to racial tolerance immediately following September 11, 2001, the government’s most significant response, to date, has been the introduction of Bill C-36 (Act) which is without question the most brazen repudiation of the Charter of Rights that we have seen since its inception. Ostensibly targeted at «terrorist activity», the Act will clearly have a chilling effect on unions and workers who exercise the right to strike, undermines access to information and privacy and puts individuals at risk of incarceration.

A second omnibus bill, Bill C-42, the Public Safety Act, is also hugely problematical from a freedom of association and freedom of assembly perspective. It allows the Minister of Defence to designate an area of land, water or air as a military security zone with the possibility that protest and strike activity will be further curtailed.

The PSAC suspended strike activity on September 11, 2001 in recognition of the increased security that would result in Canada and the fact that many PSAC members were required to assist in the immediate aftermath of the crisis.

We also took a strong anti-racism stand in communication to PSAC members and staff and in a presentation to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights.

In our submission to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, the PSAC argued that the Bill struck the wrong balance between security and human rights. Our submission outlined three specific areas of concern, namely:

• The definition of terrorist activity defined as an act « that is committed in whole or in part, for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause » may well capture strike activity, political dissent and protest;
• Provisions that allow a Minister to override the Access to Information and Privacy Act; and,
• Provisions that allow the government to override individual rights in the form of eavesdrop on verbal and electronic conversations between Canadians and others, and preventative arrest and investigations.

In separate submissions and representations to government, PSAC Components have addressed issues such as airport and airline security, customs and immigration. In addition, PSAC Components have been actively involved at the departmental level to ensure that PSAC members’ health and safety is protected as an important part of the government’s response to the heightened security that has prevailed since September 11^th.

While we have a developed position on many of the specific issues related to both traditional security services as well as economic security and protection of human rights, the positions need to be more fully integrated and connected in the current context, so that we don’t for example talk about increased airport and airline security without addressing human rights’ issues. To help ensure that this happens, to further our security in government work, and to ensure that it addresses all issues, and not simply traditional security services, the PSAC has consolidated its security in government work under two Elected Officers.

As a union committed to human rights and social justice, and representative of a considerable number of members who assist in the development and implementation of a range of security services, our first objective is to ensure that the government strikes the right balance between protecting Canadians and human rights. This includes:

• Ensuring that our members can undertake their work in a safe environment ;
• Providing workplace health and safety and training ;
• Promoting workplaces that are free of racism ;
• Ensuring that security services are provided by public sector workers and that they are not privatized or contracted out ;
• Ensuring that both security services and programs promoting economic security and protection of human rights are properly staffed and funded ; and,
• Mobilizing our members to workplace health and safety and equity issues in the light of the increased priority of security.

The PSAC has started a process to focus its next Convention on political issues that are a priority for the union and its membership. Security has been identified by the National Board of Directors as one issue that should be on our agenda.

• When you think security, what aspects concern you the most?
• Has your perception of security changed since September 11, 2001?
• What does security mean to you as a worker? As a community member? As a union member? As a Canadian?
• What are some of the gaps in what we know about the impact of an increased government priority on security on the members of our union? What educational and mobilization tools do we need?
• Have you been involved in any way in the security debate? With who, what organization? What did you learn? What actions did you take?
• What actions can we take, individually and collectively, at the local, regional, national and international levels to ensure that people are safe, secure and free from harassment in their workplaces, communities and country?
• How would you balance the need for security with the right to dissent strike and protest ?
• Why should security and the protection of human rights form part of the PSAC’s agenda and be addressed by delegates to the 2003 Triennial Convention? What aspects of security and human rights should we focus on? What could the PSAC security and human rights action plan look like? What strategies should we take?

 PSAC Discussion Papers  |  Back