I will skip some of the very beginning--the welcomes--and go more into the substance of my opening remarks, just in the interest of time.
One of the recommendations was to create a council of external advisers to oversee the implementation of the task force recommendations. Consistent with this recommendation, three years ago the government established the RCMP Reform Implementation Council to provide expert advice on the modernization of the RCMP.
The council's mandate ended on December 19, 2010. In each of its five reports, this independent council provided a largely positive assessment of the RCMP's progress on its transformation agenda. In its last report, which was publicly released in January 2011, the council stated, and I quote, that “most of the specific problems identified...by the Task Force are being effectively addressed”.
[Translation]
This is a significant accomplishment given the breadth and number of Task Force recommendations.
I would also like to add that provinces and territories who contract RCMP police services have been actively engaged in the process of modernization and have expressed their support for RCMP reform efforts.
However, today I would like to focus my remarks on the RCMP modernization efforts that have been led by my department, Public Safety Canada, in the areas of external oversight and contract policing.
[English]
Commissioner Elliott will speak to the transformation agenda that he has been actively pursuing within the force, including his efforts to strengthen RCMP management.
To begin, allow me to address the issue of external oversight. After extensive consultations with partners and stakeholders, including provinces and territories who contract RCMP police services, Public Safety Canada developed a legislative proposal to address the concerns raised by many groups, including those of this committee in its 2007 report.
I'm pleased to report that Public Safety Canada's work on external oversight resulted in the 2010 budget announcement of $8 million over two years for a new civilian independent review and complaints commission for the RCMP.
It also led to the introduction of Bill , last June. This bill proposes the creation of a new commission for public complaints, which would replace the existing review body, the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP.
Under Bill , the new RCMP review and complaints commission would have significantly enhanced investigative powers, including the power to compel testimony and evidence. In addition, the bill provides the new commission with broad access to information needed to fulfill its mandate, including expressly providing the commission with access to privileged information where it is relevant and necessary.
To my knowledge, this sets a new precedent for review bodies in Canada.
[Translation]
Bill also streamlines the complaints process, and provides the new Commission with other authorities, such as the power to share information and conduct joint reviews with others, including provincial police review bodies.
[English]
Bill goes beyond strengthening the RCMP public complaints regime. The bill also establishes a mechanism to improve the transparency and accountability of serious incident investigations involving RCMP members. It substantively addresses the issue of who is policing the police. This includes the requirement of referring such investigations, wherever possible, to other investigative bodies, such as Alberta's special investigative response teams, and appointing civilian independent observers to assess the impartiality in cases where the investigation is undertaken by any police force.
These requirements would build upon and formalize the RCMP policy on external investigations that was announced by the commissioner in February 2010. It is expected that this and other changes will contribute to strengthening the RCMP and ensuring continued public confidence in the RCMP.
[Translation]
Turning now to the issue of contract policing, my department has been actively negotiating the renewal of provincial, territorial and municipal Police Services Agreements, which are set to expire in March 2012.
[English]
The proposed agreements include mechanisms that will significantly improve accountability and modernize the relationship between the federal government and the contract jurisdictions. As you know, we have contracts in place with eight provinces, three territories, and about 200 municipalities.
One such mechanism is the creation of a new contract management committee to provide the provinces and territories with much greater opportunity to provide input on issues that impact the cost and quality of RCMP services in their jurisdictions. These negotiations are progressing well, and I hope we will have agreements in principle with the contract jurisdictions shortly.
Before closing, I'd like to comment on the one recommendation made by this committee in 2007 that has not yet been addressed. That is the recommendation to create a police accountability board, which we have come to call a “board of management”. While Commissioner Elliott may also wish to comment on this issue--and I'm sure he will--permit me to make a few observations.
As you may know, I worked with a board of management in my former role as Commissioner of the Canada Revenue Agency. The RCMP is, of course, a very different organization with a unique operating environment, and its governance framework must be considered with that in mind.
I recognize that there have been calls from the task force, the Reform Implementation Council, and many others to establish a board of management for the RCMP. Given the importance of this institution to the safety and security of Canadians, any major decision on RCMP governance can only be made after extremely careful consideration of the matter and meaningful consultations with stakeholders, including contract jurisdictions.
I'd like to underscore that given the breadth of issues on RCMP modernization that have been identified in a variety of reviews and reports, including this body's helpful 2007 report, we frankly needed to prioritize our efforts.
First, as a matter of priority, the RCMP addressed the many administrative and management issues that had been identified. The results of this initiative were recently highlighted in the RCMP September 2010 progress report entitled “Transformation of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police”.
Secondly, the government focused its efforts on strengthening external oversight of the RCMP, which of course resulted in Bill , which I mentioned earlier.
In addition, Bill , the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Modernization Act, was introduced in Parliament in June 2010 by the President of the Treasury Board, with a view to modernizing the RCMP's labour relations regime.
[Translation]
Lastly, in terms of priorities, we have directed our efforts to contract policing negotiations, which include new relationships with contract jurisdictions.
We can now properly turn our attention to strengthening the internal oversight and considerations associated with a board of management and any other related governance changes.
[English]
Internal governance is an extraordinarily complex issue, and it is important that we take the time to get this right for the RCMP and for Canadians. The RCMP has been developing its views on this issue. We will soon be in a position to consider the work undertaken by the RCMP, and be in a position so that I can provide advice to the minister and the government.
I would note, of course, that any decision on governance is a machinery issue that ultimately remains the prerogative of the .
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd be happy to answer any questions after my colleague has spoken.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Translation]
I am pleased to be here with my colleague, Deputy Minister Baker, and I would like to thank you for the opportunity to provide an update on the RCMP's transformation efforts.
[English]
Since the government provided its response to the committee's report of December 2007, I believe the committee has been briefed periodically on progress in addressing the committee's recommendations.
Following the committee's report and that of the Task Force on Governance and Cultural Change in the RCMP, both in December of 2007, the RCMP embarked on a comprehensive and ambitious transformation initiative.
[Translation]
Simply put, our objective has been to bring about positive change in the force in order to better serve Canadians and better support our employees.
I would like to highlight some of the changes we have made, including changes to improve transparency and accountability.
[English]
Let me begin by saying that I believe the RCMP is a stronger organization today than it was when issues surrounding its pension and insurance plans came to light. Much of the progress we have made is summarized, as Mr. Baker indicated, in our report entitled “Progress--Transformation of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police”. I believe the provided copies to the committee last fall.
The progress outlined in that report is in support of our vision for change for the RCMP to be an adaptive, accountable, trusted organization of fully engaged employees demonstrating outstanding leadership and providing world-class police services.
I believe this vision supports many of the principles reflected in the recommendations of the committee. For example, we created the Office of Professional Integrity within the RCMP, and appointed retired Major General Joseph Hincke as our professional integrity officer. His role is to advance ethical and values-based decision-making throughout the organization; and to oversee discipline, honours, recognition, and the application of the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act.
The Office of Professional Integrity also supports our policy on external investigations or review adopted last year to provide further assurance that serious incidents involving employees of the RCMP will be thoroughly and independently investigated. We recognize that transparency and accountability are vital to the public support on which we rely in carrying out our mandate promoting the safety and security of Canadians.
The RCMP, and I as commissioner, are very supportive of other proposed enhancements to independent oversight and review of the RCMP, including proposed legislation to establish an independent review and complaints commission, which would build on the existing Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP.
The senior executive of the RCMP and I are also on record as supporting recommended governance changes for the RCMP, specifically that the RCMP become a separate agency supported by a board of management.
[Translation]
The senior executive of the RCMP and I are also on record as supporting recommended governance changes for the RCMP, specifically that the RCMP become a separate agency supported by a board.
[English]
As our transformation report highlights, we have made significant progress on a broad range of issues. We have improved our performance on access to information requests; strengthened our policies, training, and reporting requirements on the use of force, notably in relation to conducted energy weapons or tasers; and introduced a new policy on the responsibility to report, clarifying and strengthening reporting requirements relating to major police incidents.
Among the priorities we have been addressing are leadership, training and development, and significant improvements in investments have also been made in these critically important areas. We have also been successful in our efforts to obtain greater authority with respect to procurement and contracting, including pursuant to the investment planning initiative undertaken by Public Works and Government Services Canada.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I would like to refer to significant changes to both our organizational structure and the makeup of the RCMP's senior management team. We have streamlined the senior executive committee and appointed uniquely qualified individuals to our senior management team. This includes a number of new commanding officers and other senior officials in our divisions--that is the provinces and territories--and at national headquarters. The senior management team is committed to working collaboratively to create a culture of continuous improvement and to accelerate the pace and scope of positive change within the RCMP.
[Translation]
Thank you again, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to the committee's questions.
:
Thank you very much, Chair.
Commissioner, Deputy Minister, thank you very much for your attendance here today.
I'd like to pick up on the last series of questions, because I think it's the crux of why we've asked you to be here--namely, why is the oversight board not in place? Why aren't things happening? Why aren't there, at the very least, clear recommendations asking that this be done?
I just want to set the stage here a little bit. I hear what the deputy is saying, but some of us who have experienced these areas also see it a little differently from how others do. In a previous life, I was Solicitor General of Ontario and responsible for all the policing in Ontario. Every single municipal police service in the province of Ontario has a police services board, with the exception of the OPP. Much like the situation in the RCMP, I was the civilian head of that, and my next agenda item was to do that, but then an election came along. History unfolded a little differently, and it remains undone.
A lot of us have experience with this in communities. Those police service boards are accountable to the community, and they're accountable to the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services, OCCPS. They have that accountability on both sides.
Let's go back to the very beginning. I will direct this to you, Deputy.
Mr. Brown was appointed to be an independent investigator, and he said:
The powers vested in the Commissioner of the RCMP make the holder of that office much more powerful than any corporate CEO. Accordingly, the attitudes and demeanour of the Commissioner pervade the RCMP more fundamentally than would be the case in most corporate environments.
He also goes on to say that the current RCMP paramilitary governance model
is not a governance model that investors in a $3 billion business would accept [because] a sophisticated business organization of this size cannot provide appropriate transparency and accountability within a command and control structure.
Mr. Brown then went on to recommend that a task force be created to look at this very issue further. He was appointed to be the head of that task force, and that task force--Mr. Brown again--came out and said:
Legislation should be enacted by the Parliament of Canada as soon as possible to establish a Board of Management of the RCMP responsible for the stewardship of its organization and administration including the oversight of the management of its financial affairs, resources, services, property, personnel and procurement.
We then went on to the RCMP Reform Implementation Council, which is the third step. The last report of that council said:
From the beginning, the Council has seen the introduction of a management board--a formal mechanism of external advice, oversight and guidance--as an essential aspect of successful and sustainable RCMP reform. We believe that such an improved and updated governance model will become the foundation upon which all successful reforms and improvements rest.
The cherry on the cake is that it was a unanimous report by all of us. We all agreed--even the government members--on the recommendation that Borys has already read into the record.
So across the board, everybody is saying, “Let's do this. There are good reasons. We have the experience. We have the plan. Let's do it.”
We're asking you in here to tell us, why isn't it happening?
:
Mr. Chair, I hope I don't repeat myself too much.
I've had an opportunity to read all of those reports, and I'm familiar with them. I know there is certainly a strong view in favour of the establishment of some form of board. I've read the argumentation. When I was at the Canada Revenue Agency, I was consulted on this, in fact, in terms of my views, because it is, to my knowledge, the only other federal institution that has a board of management that's shaped that way, outside of the crown sector, with boards of directors.
It is, however, a very significant decision for the government to make, and ultimately the Prime Minister to make, with respect to whether or not this will provide value. And that process is still unfolding.
I know the recommendation has been out there for several years right now, but, with respect, when you look at the change agenda for the RCMP, it has been extremely busy. There are bills in the House. There have been other reports. Contract negotiations with the provinces and territories are in full flight. As I indicated earlier, the government's priorities have been established--to get those in place first and then look at what the residual value might be of a board of management.
So we'll await input from the RCMP on this. I know that Commissioner Elliott and his team are working on this. We'll have a look at that...recommendations we've made to the government, and we'll see.
:
It's a cute little performance.
I've got to tell you, Commissioner, that I hear what you're saying; you mouth the words, but then the deputy, who has to make things happen....
I've got to tell you, sir, I take your words and previous answers.... That's why we've called you in. I could set it to music. It's like dancing. I've got to tell you, right up front, what this looks like: the whole world is saying this ought to be done but there's a block somewhere.
I mean, even the commissioner is now telling us he thinks it should be done. So I don't know where the block is.
Is it you, Deputy, refusing to act on all of these good ideas? You keep saying we need to look at it more and study it more. I'm sorry, sir, it sounds like you're just delaying, delaying, delaying.
All the evidence is there. I don't understand what it has to do with labour negotiations, or negotiations with the provinces. We're talking about a macro overview board. You can still have a provincial version of that to deal with the contracts, if you wish.
I'd like to hear an answer as to how we should accept your words today as anything other than a big song and dance that's meant to delay things and basically to leave the status quo in place.
Convince me I'm wrong--please.
Mr. Baker, when I finished questioning the commissioner on whether or not it was the Prime Minister who was blocking the establishment of this board of management, the commissioner stated that the Prime Minister had not been briefed on governance changes.
You clearly indicated in your opening remarks, and you repeated, that:
I would note that any decision on RCMP governance is a Machinery issue that ultimately remains the prerogative of the Prime Minister.
We have a federal institution, our federal police force, that's been terribly broken. We had over a year-long parliamentary investigation. The key recommendation was this board of accountability, of management.
The key recommendations of the task force, the key recommendation of the Reform Implementation Council, stated:
The first requirement is for the Government to appoint a board of management to provide the RCMP with a necessary external perspective on how it can best achieve its mission, to serve as a check on decision-making at the highest levels.
Everyone has said this is the key recommendation. It's unanimous.
We've heard from the commissioner that the Prime Minister hasn't even been briefed about this.
I'd like to know, do you feel that you've received direction from the Prime Minister's Office on whether or not you're to move on this? It's taken three years. Has this been an abdication of duty? The RCMP is a critically important federal institution. It's our federal police force.
First, I'd like to ask if the analysts, in preparation for when we're report-writing, would be good enough to give us a briefing note on the issue that the deputy has raised. In his remarks, he said, “I would note that any decision on RCMP governance is a Machinery”--that's with a capital--“issue that ultimately remains the prerogative of the Prime Minister”. Could they delve into that for us and give us a bit of a legal briefing as to what exactly...?
I'm not questioning your veracity, sir. I just want to understand. Is that the only way? What does that mean exactly? What are our alternatives? That's what I'm looking for.
Here's where I'm having some difficulty. So far, virtually everyone who has touched this, whether it's us as parliamentarians, independent investigators, councils, task forces...all have unanimously said, including the commissioner of the RCMP--and if I'm putting words in your mouth, Commissioner, please correct me, and I know you will--that a third party oversight body is something that would be good for the RCMP and we ought to do it. If we're at that point, then that kind of leaves you, sir, sitting there somewhat isolated, in my eyes.
I want to understand. What is it that you need that you don't have today to make this a reality? Is it a direction from the minister and/or a direction from the Prime Minister? Is there something else? What exactly, sir, do you not have right now that you need in order to create this? What are the impediments to your getting that directive? What's stopping it?
We seem to get to you, deputy, and up till then everybody is on side, and then the support just falls off. I'm wondering, what would it take for you as a deputy to be given the direction to do this?
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The RCMP today is an organization of some 31,000 employees. About two-thirds of those employees are police officers--in round figures, 20,000. About one-third, or 10,000, are civilians, either civilian members of the RCMP or public servants. We provide services across the country from about 800 locations, about 750 detachments.
We do international policing, federal policing, and provincial and territorial policing, and we also provide services to all police forces in Canada, services such as, for example, CPIC, the criminal records database, the DNA database, the fingerprint database. We run a college here in Ottawa for advanced training and development.
We are a very large, very modern police force, really in every jurisdiction and in some 26 countries around the world in consulates, embassies, and high commissions, and we also participate in international peacekeeping efforts in places today, including Sudan, Côte d'Ivoire, Afghanistan, and Haiti.
:
Thank you. That was easy.
This issue was the subject of a study that lasted three to four years. Three to four years later, there is still no board of management. So it has been talked about for seven years.
If this had happened in a private business, there could be two possible explanations: it could have been due to the incompetence and complacency of employees, who would have ended up being fired, or it could have been because those in charge wanted to block the process. There would have been an explanation one way or the other. A private business would not wait seven years to implement something that was essential and that everyone wanted; everyone meaning the Department of Public Safety, the RCMP and Parliament.
How long will this take, 10 years? Had there been a desire to do due diligence, it would have to have started well before the final report was, in order to figure out how the department would respond and how the RCMP would follow up. Seven years later, Mr. Baker, you are telling us that you still have several points that need verifying, and that you need time before you come up with a recommendation.
Are the committee members being taken for fools? Are parliamentarians being taken for fools? Do you take us for fools?
It's simple. If this kind of system is going to take 10 years, should we just draw a line through it, draw a big X on it, and start another project three years later?
No matter how you look at it, this will have taken 10 years. It's shameful. That would not have been acceptable in a private business. It's all very well to say that the RCMP has its unique characteristics. The Canada Revenue Agency also differs from other agencies, and many other organizations are different. However, it is unacceptable that this has taken so long and that so little has been done—so little. It is unbelievable.
I will end with that. If you would like to respond, go ahead. If not, then do not. I repeat that this is a shameful situation.
Thank you, Mr. Marston, for your bit of logic that's come into the committee.
We hear comments that there's so much time and so little to do; in my mind, it reflects the lack of understanding of the magnitude of what we're trying to do to make a significant change in terms of the management and the oversight of such a significant force. It doesn't mean that there shouldn't be, but I can tell you that I would want to be one, as an elected person, as all of us are, one of 308, that when we have that oversight and when we make those changes, as they're phased in...not whether we do it or not, yes, but actually that the phase-in is properly phased and that all the things at the end of the day are good for Canadians, and more importantly, good for the RCMP and those officers who are responsible for our safety and the safety of this country in terms of their jurisdiction.
An hon. member: Hear, hear!
Mr. Bev Shipley: I take offence, actually, to some of the aggressive comments about so little to do, understanding very much about it...so thank you so much for giving clarification in terms of the timelines.
I do want to go back. On the report that came out, in terms of the main report, it was 10 or 12 years to bring in. Does government move slowly? Yes, sometimes in terms of business, it does, but in this particular case, this is a huge change.
I just want to switch gears, if you don't mind. I'd like to go back to the task force a little bit. On July 16, 2007, the brought in the creation of a five-member task force to provide advice in strengthening the accountability and the governance of the RCMP. The report on the governance and the culture change was released I think in December 2007. The release, then, has been out that would report a number of changes, hopefully that have maybe enhanced policing programs as well as service to the employees. It is two-pronged, from my understanding.
You've had the opportunity now to have some time on the evaluation of that. I wonder if you could speak to the strengths, the positive things that may have come out of that, and maybe even speak to any weaknesses or things that maybe need to continue to be addressed.