How politicians in Ottawa understand and perceive the auto theft crisis
Over the past weeks, CADA has been publicly supportive of the government’s introduction of measures, in the recently delivered 2024 federal budget, aimed at tackling auto theft.
Like every other type of legislation, the budget has to be debated in Parliament and the majority of its provisions have to be carefully studied by committees from both the House and the Senate.
On top of that, CADA was honored to be invited to the Senate’s committee on judicial and constitutional affairs (CJCA) to offer insights on these specific anti-theft provisions.
While the government’s (somewhat late) productivity is truly appreciated by the industry, these committee hearings are the perfect place to underline the necessity for these measures to be approved or, in some instances, to potentially tweak them.
One of the most important developments from this budget was the approval of a 28 million dollars of extra funding package dedicated to local police forces and the Canadian Border Service Agency. This is directly aligned with what the auto sector, from manufacturers to the exporters, have been advocating for. Since the beginning of this crisis, it was evident that the main key driver was the lack of disincentives to steal for these criminals.
Whether it is the absence of fear towards our judicial system or the apparent simplicity (and associated gain) of doing such crime, there is no doubt that thieves are not thinking twice.
This is in part why CADA was pleased to see all political parties collaborate and come up with positive criminal code amendments to penalize the usage of dedicated auto-theft technology and to capture the role of organized crime in this type of illegal activities.
One area of the problem that could benefit from the extra funding is the lack of enforcement in the Port of Montréal and other key strategic maritime locations. By lacking the resources required to hire the right personnel or not having the funds to invest in new and innovative technologies, our border agents have been fighting these crime organizations with one hand tied behind their backs.
As you are well aware by now, I like to use these columns as a way of not only presenting what’s going on the political side of the auto sector and how CADA is involved in it, but also to express a more positive, optimistic and collaborative message than the one coming out directly from the political arena of Ottawa.
I say this because issues like the auto-theft crisis are truly multifaceted and will demand more than one wave of solutions, but multiple attempts by our elected officials. On the other hand, all relevant industry partners starting from bureaucratic bodies to auto specific associations like the ones you know well will have to continue presenting themselves as bringers of solutions instead of shedders of responsibilities.
One of the most important developments from this budget was the approval of a 28 million dollars of extra funding package dedicated to local police forces and the Canadian Border Service Agency.
I saw a glimpse of that finger pointing mentality by interacting with port officials in the summer, where it appeared as if the ongoing Canadian-wide auto theft crisis could only be rationalized by the lack of action by somebody else. Very few innovative ideas and potential solutions were brought to the table in these discussions, almost as if admitting the room for improvement meant shouldering the blame for this important problem.
I observed this dynamic once again when testifying on the Senatorial committee. While there was obviously no ill-will coming from these committee members, the question period rapidly started to morph into monologues on how the Canadian auto theft problem should be fixed — and probably already should have been — managed and solved by the automotive industry.
Even if CADA brought up the role of automobile dealers as educators on best in-class anti-theft practices and other automotive representatives introduced the new technologies being implemented, the discussion became less about finding holistic solutions to a complex challenge and more about what the auto sector should have done better.
In fairness, this is the role of public examiners and this type of approach is often necessary. However, when not balanced properly, this rhetoric can rapidly put organizations at odds when, in fact, collaboration is an utmost priority.
In reality, most countries have experienced a rise in auto theft. For most of these nations, the increase has been 8-11 per cent between 2021 and 2022. In Canada, the increase was 23 per cent. We are going through a phenomenon that is unique to our nation, and will only be fixed if actors who have a role to play take responsibility, improve, innovate and, most importantly, collaborate.
To keep Canadians safe and to maintain consumers’ trust in our industry, everybody involved has to keep sharing important information, propose creative ideas, identify the great decisions and the inevitable mishaps.
If our political and industry leaders keep on embodying this mentality, Canada will be in good shape… auto theft crisis or not.
