Talk:Canada Border Services Agency
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Canada Border Services Agency article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Start class until there are some references, I'm afraid--SGGH 11:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Building the CBSA page
The CBSA entry has been pathetically small forever. I've decided to try and build it up, but it's a pretty big job. In comparison to the RCMP entry, this thing is laughable. But, considering that it is the second-biggest law enforcement agency in Canada, it needs to be better.
I work for the CFIA, and am having a dickens of a time including the CFIA logo because of copyright issues. How were you able to use the CBSA seal? Did you need to get special permission? NCL75 (talk) 12:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Anyone who wants to help out with the rebuild is more than welcome. I'm not sure that how I've formatted it is all that great, but it will do for now. It needs information thrown in and categorized, and then we can figure out how to format it. It should also spawn the creation of several new pages which don't yet exist, including:
- Integrated Border Enforcement Team
- Border Services Officer
I will add more as I come across them.
The article needs some images, such as the logo, etc. It could also use a section of the rank insignias, which some military pages have. Basically there's a whole lot to be done here.
(10 Sep 2006 1646GMT) - Rank insignias? What rank insignias? Superintendent 2 stripes, chief 3 stripes :).
- Rigaud facilitators have 1 1/2 stripes, there's something above a Chief that has 4 stripes.
The Border Services Officer page has been created, but is bare bones. I'm working on an IBET page. Addin some US info to it would be great once it's up. I've also categorized and cross-linked to more related pages. Cfish039
I wish to add a clarification to the article which states:
"The intensity of an examination depends on the reasonable grounds that the officer has to escalate the intensiveness of a search."
This statement is specific only to the subject of searches of the person (section 98 of the customs act.) Reasonable grounds are neccesary to justify the need for compelling the traveller to disrobe or submit to more invasive procedures.
It should be noted that examination of purses and wallets, and the pockets of coats and pants etc do not require such grounds. Furthermore, in the event that a traveller is detained or arrested, a very thorough "frisk" is reasonable to ensure there are no weapons or other threats to the officer's safety.
Reasonable grounds are also not required for the examination of any sort of goods or conveyances (vehicles), to whatever depth the officer feels is required accomplish his duty. Based on the principal that a soverign nation has the right to control all goods entering its borders, the freedom to inspect objects is essentially unlimited. - Observer94
- Yes and no. Reasonable grounds are more stringent under section 98, but under section 99 there are still limitations. The CBSA is still limited by the Charter, particularly sections 8, 9 and 10. Unreasonable search and seizure, and arbitrary arrest and detention still apply. There is a grey area where a regular customs examination turns into a detention. In particular, this comes into play when BSOs are enforcing the Criminal Code. They must, for example, have RPGs to arrest for impaired driving and reasonable suspicion to demand a sample of a person's breath. There's no carte blanche in play. It is simply less stringent.
Immigration to Canada
This section, in my opinion needs serious work. The statistics quoted are out of date (end of 2003) and the end of the second paragraph hardly makes any sense:
"There are very few illegal immigrants who enter the country without first being admitted by the CBSA. The reason for this is that Canada is physically very difficult to get to, with the exception of crossing the Canada/U.S. border. As the U.S. is itself a prime destination for illegal immigrants, not many illegal immigrants then attempt to cross the border into Canada in the wild. This differs significantly from the illegal immigration patterns in the U.S., which stem from illegal border crossings."
I am not sure what this section should contain as the article is about the CBSA. It might contain the role of CBSA in Canada's immigration process which is primary determination of admissibility at the port of entry as well as detention, and removal of inadmissible persons. These duties were taken over from Citizenship and Immigration Candada. Gordon Bonnar 00:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
CBSA agency is part of the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), a union that also promotes social justice, gender and racial equality. The fact that they include a partially-armed force such as CBSA could be considered contradictory (perhaps disgraceful).Opusv5 (talk) 18:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Is the Canada Border Services Agency the ONLY agency performing checks on Canadian borders? I was told (don't know how true it was) that the RCMP were doing checks on borders as well but mainly secondary ones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 13:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- Border checks (ie. Passport/Cargo), etc are done by BSOs from CBSA. I don't think RCMP are involved unless there's a threat beyond what CBSA can handle.--Cahk (talk) 21:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
CBSA has a long history of discriminating against gays.. someone should add a blurb about that. Lots of court cases/etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 07:15, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Info about entry compliant issues....
Insert non-formatted text here== CBSA shoulder patch ==
Is the uniform should patch currently depicted out of date? It doesn't look like it matches the new heraldic devices unveiled in July this year. However, I haven't been able to find an image of the new patch so I'm proposing that we take it out for now, unless of course I'm mistaken. Any thoughts? Jagislaqroo (talk) 22:03, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
I have a digital photo of the new shoulder I do not know how to change it on this site, u can email me at email@example.com and I can send to someone who does know how to
NPOV: "Recent successes"
I have flagged this article for NPOV issues because of its section headed "Recent successes". The title of this section alone makes a value judgment on the operations it describes, and the absence of a corresponding section for recent "failures" seems biased. This leaves at least some of this page looking like a self-congratulatory press release rather than a neutral article. I'm not in a position to judge the notability of the events described in the "Recent successes" section, but if they are not particularly notable, then simply removing this section could probably solve the NPOV issue. Otherwise the section may need to be retitled, reworded, and/or balanced with extra information on the agency's notable failures. —Psychonaut (talk) 11:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- In the absence of any discussion on the matter in the last three months, I have boldly removed the section on "recent successes". I did some rudimentary investigation and found that at least some of the material was posted in violation of copyright (i.e., copy-and-pasted directly from news wire releases). The other material wasn't sourced at all, and I couldn't find third-party sources establishing its notability. If anyone feels that this material should be restored it would be great if they could first provide citations. —Psychonaut (talk) 07:59, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Incidents and Controversies
This entry reads as if it was written by a public relations officer with the CBSA. A little criticism is warranted as the CBSA is among the most controversial government organizations in Canada. There is little governance and effectively no way to complain about the CBSA. They have extraordinary powers such as imprisoning people without trial for up to 8 years in some cases. Members of the CBSA have been charged with sexual assault and other crimes related to their duties. None of this appears to be covered. It would be great if someone with authority and knowledge on the topic could make this article a little more balanced. For example:
"In 1999 a black man was racially profiled and singled out for a search on a train border crossing from the United States, the CBSA later apologized and settled out of court with the victim in 2002 rather than face a hearing at the Canadian Human Rights Commission."
THE ABOVE INCIDENT (AND THE SUPPOSED SETTLEMENT) OCCURRED BEFORE THE STATED INCEPTION OF CBSA IN LATE 2003
"Robert Dziekański, Polish pronunciation: [ˈrɔbɛrt dʑeˈkaɲski] (April 15, 1967 – October 14, 2007) was a Polish immigrant to Canada who was killed on October 14, 2007 during an arrest at the Vancouver Airport. He was tasered five times, while he was unarmed and detained alone in a secured room at the Vancouver International Airport in Richmond, British Columbia."
THE ABOVE INCIDENT INVOLVED TASERING BY THE RCMP, NOT THE CBSA. THE WAY THIS ENTRY IS WRITTEN IMPLIES THAT CBSA OFFICERS WERE THE ONES DEPLOYING THE TASER.
INFORMATION ABOUT CBSA'S INTERACTION WITH DZIEKANSKI BEFORE HIS ENCOUNTER WITH RCMP, AND WHAT CBSA OFFICERS ON SITE WERE DOING WHEN HE WAS TASERED WOULD BE GOOD INFORMATION. AS STATED, CBSA OFFICERS ARE QUALIFIED TO CONDUCT LAW ENFORCEMENT, YET VANCOUVER AIRPORT STAFF CALLED THE RCMP TO THE SCENE. WHERE WAS CBSA? THIS ARTICLE http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=a98c73b8-0b6c-4903-ab7a-f34bcf8f63a9&p=1 MIGHT PROVIDE A GOOD STARTING POINT FOR RESEARCHING CBSA'S RELATION TO THE DZIEKANSKI INCIDENT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwagstaf (talk • contribs) 13:37, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
- I think you are right about the 1999 incident. I deleted it. The way it was worded does not make any sense considering that the CBSA was not created until 2003. There is no place for that incident in this article, the only place it would be appropriate would be in articles about border law enforcement pre CBSA or issues related to border law enforcement in Canada.
- I also wanted to point out that I moved the TV blurb from its own section to a subheader under this heading. Given the controversy and Privacy Act violation I feel that it is more pertinent to have info on the TV show here, instead of buried at the bottom of the page under its own heading. - A Canadian Toker (talk) 14:17, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Canada Border Services Agency. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111211213005/http://www.canlii.org:80/en/ca/scc/doc/2000/2000scc69/2000scc69.html to http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2000/2000scc69/2000scc69.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at
You may set the
|checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting
|needhelp= to your help request.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
If you are unable to use these tools, you may set
|needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.