Welcome to RCC

August 1, 2007

Cheryl Mahyr
Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services
25 Grosvenor Street, 13th Floor
Toronto ON M7A 1Y6
VIA E-MAIL (jus.g.sgcs.webmaster@ontario.ca)

Dear Ms. Mahyr:

On behalf of Retail Council of Canada (RCC) and its members operating in Ontario, I am writing in response to the recent invitation to comment on two new draft regulations posted under Bill 159, Private Security and Investigative Services Act (the Act).

As a member of the Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services Advisory Committee on the Act, RCC has enjoyed the opportunity to work together with other key stakeholders to provide expertise and advice to the government towards the development of these regulations. Indeed, this is very important work and we are deeply committed to providing the government with our responsible and credible expertise and advice on a broad range of areas.

We look forward to continuing the dialogue with the Ministry over the coming months on the development of future regulations and towards smooth implementation of the rules to ensure that they support the needs of the community as well as retailers.

Training and Testing
From the beginning, RCC and its members have supported training and testing requirements for security personnel. Retailers have already done their due diligence in relation to training for in-house retail loss prevention officers and our primary objective has always been to ensure that the regulations do not duplicate the considerable financial resources invested in the development of internal training programs already in place.

As such, we are pleased that the regulation allows for training by trainers employed by the business entity registered under the Act that employ the applicant. In order to become a "recognized trainer", the regulation proposes:

4. (3) A trainer who is seeking to be recognized by the Ministry shall provide the Registrar with,
(a) a copy of his or her credentials;
(b) a list of the training courses that he or she offers; and
(c) his or her contact information.

On behalf of our members and their employees who will be seeking recognition as trainers, RCC respectfully requests further clarification on what is meant by "credentials". Further, explanation is requested as to what is meant by "a list of the training courses". In-house loss prevention training may be part of a larger training initiative, and not a "course" per se. Is the Registrar seeking a copy of the training material, or simply the name of the training program (as is implied by "list")?

Section 5 of the proposed regulation specifies the applicants that are exempt from the basic training requirements. Included in that list is:

5. 3. An individual who was employed as a full-time security guard or private investigator for at least six continuous months in the three years before [insert date regulation is filed] (emphasis added).

4. An individual who was employed as a part-time security guard or private investigator, but for not less than 20 hours a week, for at least 12 continuous months in the three years before [insert date regulation is filed] (emphasis added).

RCC supports the training exemption for security guards or private investigators already working in the field, recognizing that all applicants will be required to successfully complete a test set and administered by the Ministry. We believe that the intent of these sections is to exempt all security guards and private investigators that require licensing by the Act if they can demonstrate such work experience. However, as you know, loss prevention officers have only been considered security guards since the passage of the Act in December 2005. Loss prevention officers would not have been considered security guards before the date that the regulation is filed, and therefore may not be able to demonstrate employment as a security guard before the date that the regulation is filed. As such, we are requesting confirmation that security guards who were not captured under the previous Act are eligible for this exemption.

Finally, the regulation proposes that "specialized training" (including training with respect to firearms, batons, handcuffs or animals) be provided in accordance with "standards and guidelines established by the Ministry" and that the trainer must "issue a certificate" of successful completion. While we recognize that it is not part of the regulation itself, further explanation is requested as to the establishment of the standards and guidelines as well as the details of certification issuance.

Insurance
The regulation proposes that:

1. Every licensee that is a business entity shall carry general liability insurance in the amount of at least $2,000,000.

As retailers are considered regulated business entities and not licensed business entities, this regulation does not apply. As such, we have no comment.

Once again, thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed regulations under Bill 159, Private Security and Investigative Services Act. If you require further information or clarification, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at (416) 922-0553 extension 225.

Yours truly,

Ashley McClinton
Director, Government Relations (Ontario)

cc: Mr. Jon Herberman, Registrar/Director, Private Investigators and Security Guards Branch, Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services