INTRODUCTION

According to the Office of the Auditor General of Canada (OAG), the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) is Canada’s largest police force and had over 18,000 officers in 2018.[1] The force provides policing services for all levels of government as well as within Canada’s Indigenous communities; it also does so under contract for all provinces (except for Ontario and Quebec) and for over 150 municipalities.[2]

The RCMP is organized into 15 divisions as follows: “1 for each province and territory; 1 for its training facility in Regina, Saskatchewan [Depot Division]; and 1 for its National Division in Ottawa, Ontario.”[3] It operates about 700 local detachments that provide policing services to much of rural Canada, all of the North, and some urban communities, such as Moncton, New Brunswick, and Surrey, British Columbia. These detachments can vary in size from 2 to 750 officers[4].

RCMP officers often perform their duties in dangerous work environments which can result in life threatening situations. Since 2001, there have been 9 shooting incidents that together have resulted in the deaths of 15 members.[5]

In the spring of 2019, the OAG released a performance audit whose aim was to determine “whether the RCMP provided its officers with hard body armour and semi-automatic weapons called carbines, which are especially key in active shooter situations. The audit also looked at officer training on the use of carbines and pistols as well as the maintenance of those firearms.”[6] Exhibit 1 shows various types of firearms used by the RCMP.

Exhibit 1 – A Selection of Firearms used by Members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police

Source: Office of the Auditor General of Canada, Equipping Officers of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Report 5 of the 2019 Spring Reports of the Auditor General of Canada, Exhibit 5.1.

On 16 May 2019, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts (the Committee) held a hearing on this audit. In attendance from the OAG were Sylvain Ricard, Interim Auditor General of Canada, and Nicholas Swales, Principal. From the RCMP were Brenda Lucki, Commissioner, and Brian Brennen, Deputy Commissioner, Contract and Indigenous Policing.[7]

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

According to the OAG, on “4 June 2014, an assailant with powerful firearms killed 3 Moncton RCMP officers and wounded 2 others,” after which, “the RCMP Commissioner requested an independent review of the shooting,” known as the MacNeil Report.[8] This report found that “the officers had been outgunned by the assailant and did not have hard body armour to protect themselves against high-powered weapons. It made 64 recommendations, many of which addressed equipment and training gaps. The RCMP committed to implementing all of the recommendations,” including ensuring that members had access to hard body armour and expediting the rollout of a semi-automatic rifle called a carbine.[9]

In 2017, “the New Brunswick Provincial Court found the RCMP guilty under the Canada Labour Code for failing to provide the officers who responded to the Moncton incident with adequate equipment – specifically, carbines and hard body armour. The Court noted that the plan for the original rollout of carbines from 2012 to 2014 was under-resourced, badly managed, not properly prioritized, and lacked a sense of urgency,” which the court concluded showed a lack of concern for the “health and safety of front line members.”[10]

At the Committee hearing, Brenda Lucki, Commissioner, provided some context regarding the RCMP’s current inventory of long guns:

We have three long guns: shot guns, rifles and carbines. We're actually doing a study on whether we need all three. Each one serves a different purpose, depending on the type of policing and the rural environments. Do we have enough of each? We are studying that, but for the time being, some divisions have opted to not recertify rifles, for example, and to keep shot guns. It depends on the dynamics of the division, and we've given that decision to the individual commanding officers.[11]

A. Number of Carbines Needed

The OAG found that “the RCMP did not set a national standard for carbine distribution that defined how many carbines were needed to adequately equip officers to respond to active shooters,” nor did its “divisions consistently define who was most at risk.”[12] Therefore, the RCMP did not know whether it had provided carbines to all of the members who needed them, nor did it know how many more were needed.[13]

According to the OAG, in 2015, “the RCMP began to provide carbines to detachments when officers completed their training on the weapons. Linking the distribution of carbines to officer training made the RCMP dependent on local decision making and available funding, leading to differences in the distribution of carbines across the RCMP.”[14] Furthermore, “some detachments did not have enough carbines, which meant that they did not have any spares for when the carbines were being serviced.”[15]

Additionally, the OAG “found that at the detachment level, not all carbines were located as stated in the RCMP’s data;” thus, “RCMP National Headquarters did not have a full picture of the actual location of the carbines within the divisions,” nor could it “confirm that officers who needed the equipment had access to it.”[16]

Consequently, the OAG recommended that the RCMP “should establish a national standard to ensure that each detachment is adequately equipped with carbines.”[17]

In response to this recommendation, the RCMP stated in its Detailed Action Plan that the use of the carbine weapons system is “complemented by tactical training courses such as IARD [Immediate Action Rapid Deployment], Initial Critical Incident Response, and Crisis Intervention and De-escalation. Carbine and IARD training must now be completed by all” members immediately after they graduate from Depot Division. Furthermore, as of October 2018, commanding officers have been provided with electronic, interactive maps from National Headquarters to monitor carbine distribution and training within their divisions. Lastly, going forward, “carbine distribution mapping will be complemented by ongoing risk assessments at the division/detachment level, giving commanding officers evidence-based information to continue to make sound, risk based decisions on carbine distribution.”[18]

The OAG also recommended that the RCMP “should ensure that it has the necessary risk and distribution information at the national level to determine whether it has enough carbines to meet its obligations under the Canada Labour Code.”[19]

In response, in its action plan, the RCMP stated that it will “develop a national standard that: 1) provides clear and consistent definitions; 2) outlines processes to ensure equipment and training are distributed according to risk; and, 3) includes performance metrics to assess at the national level whether targets have been met and risk has been adequately mitigated.”[20]

At the hearing, when questioned about the availability maps, Brian Brennan, Deputy Commissioner, Contract and Indigenous Policing, provided the following explanation:

The static maps are a web-based mapping system that tracks the carbines as they get deployed to detachments. The commanding officer of the division or the people working for that particular commanding officer can bring up the detachment, and the map will show that they have so many carbines and so many trained members. Then they're able to use that in determining more deployment of carbines and to identify which members need that training in those particular detachments.

Because of the nature of mobility within the RCMP, it's important that we have eyes on the training to ensure that we keep a robust complement of members trained with access to those particular weapons.[21]

Notwithstanding this progress, the Committee nevertheless recommends:

Recommendation 1 – on a national standard for carbines and accurate data

That, by 31 December 2019, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts with a report outlining the status of its national standard to ensure that RCMP command has the best information to ensure adequate carbine distribution and availability.

B. Providing Hard Body Armour

According to the OAG, “hard body armour” protects vital organs from bullets fired from high-powered weapons. It is designed to cover most of a person’s torso and is worn over a member’s regular uniform and the regulation “soft body armour.” However, given that it weighs 7 kilograms and can restrict one’s movement, members do not need to wear hard body armour in most situations.[22]

The OAG found that although the RCMP “had enough hard body armour nationwide to meet the RCMP’s policy requirement, not all divisions met the requirement.”[23] Specifically, in 2012, the RCMP defined its policy requirement for hard body armour as one per operational vehicle plus 10%, across all divisions. Moreover, the divisions were responsible for determining their needs and distributing the armour; however, “operational vehicle” was not clearly defined.[24] Thus, to assess whether the RCMP had met this goal, the OAG considered all marked and unmarked police vehicles to be operational, and on that basis, concluded that the RCMP had enough hard body armour nationwide.[25]

Additionally, the OAG found that the RCMP “did not track its distribution of hard body armour in any national database. The only record of the armour’s distribution was at the division level. As a result, RCMP National Headquarters did not have a full picture of the actual location of the hard body armour within the divisions,” which meant that it could not determine whether it had “met its policy requirement at the detachment level of ensuring that its officers had access to this protective equipment.”[26]

Consequently, the OAG recommended that the RCMP “should ensure that it has the necessary information at the national level to determine whether detachments across the country have enough hard body armour to meet the RCMP’s obligations under the Canada Labour Code.”[27]

In its action plan, the RCMP committed to developing a national standard by March 2020, in which all operational front-line members are personally assigned hard body armour.[28] 

When questioned about whether the RCMP conducted a risk analysis to determine if smaller (i.e., fewer than five members), more vulnerable detachments might require carbines and body armour, Brenda Lucki responded as follows:

Yes, absolutely. Again, some of it was based on the geography. I'll use Manitoba as an example. There are 23 detachments that are all very far north, and seven of them are fly-in only. It takes a little longer for them to have backup in a big incident because we don't drive to those detachments. We have to ensure that they have the equipment. We make sure that they are deployed carbines and that members in those areas are trained.

. . .

Absolutely, the risk assessment was based on that and, obviously, the crime statistics as well.[29]

Therefore, the Committee recommends:

Recommendation 2 – on a national standard for hard body armour

That, by 31 December 2019, in order to ensure it meets its obligations under the Canada Labour Code, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts with a report a) outlining the progress of its national standard for the distribution and availability of hard body armour; and b) confirming that it has the proper information to ensure its compliance. Additionally, that a final report be presented to the Committee by 30 April 2020.

C. Recertification Requirements for Carbines and Pistols

According to the OAG, “using a firearm is an acquired skill: Regular training is needed to maintain and improve performance – especially because officers may need to use firearms under high levels of stress. Also, officers who have not recertified on the carbine can no longer carry one when responding to calls, placing these officers at higher risk of injury.”[30]

The RCMP requires officers who have been trained on carbines to get recertified annually. Although, the initial carbine training is a five-day course, the annual recertification is only a half-day course.[31] This is similar to the RCMP requirement that members who are “required to carry a pistol on duty must complete the pistol recertification every year.”[32]

The OAG found that “about 13% of front-line officers who had received the initial [carbine] training, and were due to recertify, had not completed the annual recertification as of 31 October 2018. When initially distributing the carbines, the RCMP did not plan for the continually growing need for carbine recertification. To recertify front-line officers who had received the initial training by October 2018, the RCMP would need to increase its training capacity by 18%. Further increases will likely be needed as more cadets are trained.”[33]

Lastly, the OAG found that “13% of all RCMP officers had not completed the mandatory pistol recertification. Although this is an improvement over the rate of 23% reported in [the] 2005 November Report of the Auditor General of Canada, Chapter 1 – Royal Canadian Mounted Police – Contract Policing, it still means that the RCMP did not meet its annual recertification requirements.”[34]

Consequently, the OAG recommended that the RCMP “should ensure that officers recertify on the use of their firearms in compliance with policy requirements.”[35]

In its action plan, the RCMP stated that in addition to “advancing efforts to understand the key factors that affect compliance rates for firearms training,” future “training practices and policies will be shaped by the feedback [received], to ensure continued police and public safety.”[36] For example, the RCMP Tactical Training Section has developed a five year plan regarding Annual Firearms Qualification approved by the Commanding Officer of Depot Division; “the strategy is based upon improving members’ operational skill sets and meeting the recommendations cited in the MacNeil Report.”[37]

When questioned about this matter, Brenda Lucki provided some insight into the particular challenges of carbine recertification:

It's not always linked to the number of instructors. It's location and the availability of ranges. Carbine is very specific in terms of what kind of [firing] range we can use, and we're very limited in that area. It's also geography. For instance, detachment members in Nunavut need to come to a central location to recertify. It's not just the fact that it's intense in terms of instructors. It's also intense in terms of moving members to locations where they can recertify.[38]

Furthermore, Brian Brennan explained the following:

It's not just about the static training in use of the carbine itself. Using private instructors has barriers in terms of the articulation of RCMP policy and how we work in teams. While private instructors may have the functional capability to fire the weapon, they would not be exposed to all the things around it that are also included in our training.[39]

Therefore, the Committee recommends:

Recommendation 3 – on firearm recertification

That, by 31 December 2019, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts with a report outlining its progress regarding firearm recertification. Additionally, that a final report be presented to the Committee by 30 April 2020.

D. Preventive Maintenance of Carbines and Pistols

The OAG found that “the RCMP did not meet its policy requirement for maintaining carbines. By 31 October 2018, [it] had 6,211 carbines in service. Almost 3,300 had been acquired before November 2015 and would therefore have required maintenance at least once in the past three years.”[40] Furthermore, 50% (1,644) of those carbines had not been maintained in the past three years.[41]

According to the OAG, to achieve 100% compliance for its current carbines, preventive maintenance is required for 2,070 carbines per year for the next three years, resulting in a 30% workload increase over the previous three-year average. The OAG also noted that “the RCMP did not plan for the ongoing preventive maintenance of the carbines when it began distributing them.”[42]

Additionally, the OAG found that “the RCMP did not meet its policy requirement for maintaining pistols. As of 31 October 2018, [it] had 26,300 pistols in its inventory, of which 18,408 (70%) were issued to officers.”[43] Moreover, “1,689 (9%) of the pistols issued to officers had not been maintained as required.”[44]

Given that members use spare pistols when their regularly issued pistols require maintenance, spares must also be maintained and ready for immediate deployment. However, the OAG determined that 4,277 (54%) of the RCMP’s spare pistol inventory had not been maintained as required.[45]

Consequently, the OAG recommended that the RCMP “should ensure that it completes its preventive maintenance on pistols and carbines in compliance with its policy requirements.”[46]

In its action plan, the RCMP stated that its “policy on firearms maintenance will clearly articulate the overall objective of the policy as well as the expected period for servicing to ensure that preventative maintenance on pistols and carbines is completed in compliance with its policy requirements.”[47] It also committed to the following milestones:

• 31 May 2019 - Firearm Manual 6 policy reviewed and updated to clearly articulate the overall objective of the policy as well as the expected period for preventive maintenance servicing.
• 30 June 2019 – National communication of the updated and clarified policy to preventative maintenance coordinators in all Divisions.
• 31 July 2019 -Progress report on preventative maintenance of personal issue pistols.
• 30 September 2019 - Progress report on preventative maintenance of carbines
• 31 December 2019 - Progress report on preventative maintenance of unit issue pistols.[48]

When questioned about the specific criteria in the RCMP’s policy regarding the maintenance of pistols and carbines, Dennis Watters, Chief Financial and Administrative Officer, provided the following update:

Initially, when we were having discussions with the OAG, we did mention to them that we will amend the policy and remove that 5,000 rounds. The 5,000 rounds criterion was there years ago because we had a lot of members who were doing competitive shooting and going to shows, but now our general duty members don't do that any more.

Essentially the 5,000 rounds issue is a moot point. We don't track the rounds anymore, but, as we told the Auditor General, we will change the policy to remove that because it is no longer relevant.[49]

Therefore, the Committee recommends:

Recommendation 4 – on preventative maintenance of firearms

That, by 31 December 2019, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts with a report outlining its progress regarding the preventative maintenance of firearms. Additionally, that a final report be presented to the Committee by 30 April 2020.

E. Acquisition of Carbines

According to the OAG, the RCMP’s decentralized approach to managing the carbine project “contributed to the RCMP and Public Services and Procurement Canada not following procurement rules.”[50] In 2015, RCMP divisions submitted requests for carbines resulting in a very large combined order; had it been procured as one large order, its dollar value would have required Treasury Board approval. However, the order was divided into three separate orders, and thus only required the contracting authority of Public Services and Procurement Canada.[51]

Per the OAG, had the RCMP placed one single carbine order, the “Treasury Board’s challenge function would have prompted the RCMP to define the objectives of the carbine acquisition and how it intended to meet them, contributing to better planning. As acquisitions increase in value, additional scrutiny is added to the acquisition process to ensure that taxpayers’ money is spent effectively.”[52] However, the OAG concluded that the RCMP did not consider all of the life-cycle stages associated with the carbine acquisition, “such as planning to meet the ongoing recertification needs for officers to safely operate the carbines,” nor did it adequately plan for their maintenance.[53]

Lastly, the OAG found that the RCMP did not provide its armouries with additional resources to manage its additional 5,500 carbines. For example, after receiving this weapon from the manufacturer, armouries require about five months to assemble and distribute them. Thus, including manufacturing, “divisions that identified a need for carbines faced about a nine-month period between ordering them and receiving them in the field.”[54]

Consequently, the OAG recommended that the RCMP “should properly manage acquisition projects, including ensuring that life-cycle requirements, such as training and maintenance, are addressed.”[55]

When questioned about why the RCMP conducted its procurement process in such a manner, Dennis Watters provided the following explanation:

When you have a standing offer, you can do call-ups against those standing offers and, in our view, it would not have resulted in any savings. (. . .) we purchased those under the Munitions Supply Program which has provided Public Services and Procurement with the means to contract large quantities of small arms.

There are four companies that are designated as sources as part of the Munitions Supply Program, one being Colt Canada, where we did procure the carbines.[56]

Additionally, in its action plan, the RCMP stated that options for a more robust project management for policing equipment will be examined and could include standardization of project documentation; costing estimates; and the establishment of an Equipment Project Management Board. Lastly, the RCMP has committed to establishing “a Committee for Assets and Materiel as part of its governance to ensure investment decisions for policing equipment include full life-cycle elements.”[57]

Therefore, the Committee recommends:

Recommendation 5 – on equipment acquisition projects

That, by 31 December 2019, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts with a report outlining its progress with regard to improving its management of acquisition projects, including ensuring that life-cycle requirements, such as training and maintenance, are addressed.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY

Michael Ferguson, the former Auditor General of Canada, reported to the Committee that inadequate data collection and use is a persistent problem facing federal organizations. Given the significance of sound data in the delivery and accurate assessment of program effectiveness, the Committee has made this issue one of its core priorities.

Regarding questions about the RCMP’s information management systems, and how they could be used, the Commissioner responded as follows:

We're always looking at technology. One thing I can say is that part of Vision 150 [the RCMP’s modernization framework] is getting better business intelligence within the RCMP. We have a lot of databases, but often we can't do the analytics. We need to get better at that.

With equipment, I know some of the technology we're rolling out.... For example, we have 800 members at the Surrey detachment. They have a system where they can track equipment coming in and going out, by each individual member. When they're assigned a CEW, a conducted energy weapon, or a carbine at the beginning of their shift and they're not individually issued, that can be tracked. Not only can it be tracked, but if somebody asks for a conducted energy weapon, and they've been off for three weeks, the system will say, “Sorry, I can't issue that, because your certification expired yesterday,” or, “It expired while you were on secondment for two months.”

The technology is there. We've rolled it out in the bigger units. We're always looking at better tracking, not only of resources such as equipment, but also with members themselves. We're tracking their whereabouts for critical incidents through android phones. We've just purchased 8,000, to better track for critical incidents, which was part of the MacNeil recommendations.[58]

Given the importance this Committee places on the proper collection and use of quality data, it thus recommends:

Recommendation 6 – on information management systems

That, by 31 December 2019, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police provide the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts with a report outlining the status of any information management systems pertaining to the tracking of inventory and distribution of carbines, pistols, and hard body armour, as well as tracking member certifications for their proper use.

CONCLUSION

The Committee concludes that the RCMP had not adequately provided all of its officers with access to hard body armour, carbines, and recertification training to respond to an active shooter situation; it also did not keep pace with its recertification requirements for pistols, nor did it ensure that pistols and carbines were properly maintained.

Although the RCMP incorporated new measures to help address these concerns, the Committee made six recommendations to ensure it continues to meet these commitments, for the improved protection and safety of its members and the Canadian public.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED ACTIONS AND ASSOCIATED DEADLINES

Table 1 – Summary of Recommended Actions and Associated Deadlines

Recommendation	Recommended Action	Deadline
Recommendation 1	The Royal Canadian Mounted Police should provide the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts with a report outlining the status of its national standard to ensure that RCMP command has the best information to ensure adequate carbine distribution and availability.	31 December 2019
Recommendation 2	The RCMP should provide Committee with a report a) outlining the progress of its national standard for the distribution and availability of hard body armour; and b) confirming that it has the proper information to ensure its compliance. Additionally, that a final report be presented to the Committee.	31 December 2019 and 30 April 2020
Recommendation 3	The RCMP should provide the Committee with a report outlining its progress regarding firearm recertification. Additionally, that a final report be presented to the Committee.	31 December 2019 and 30 April 2020
Recommendation 4	The RCMP should provide the Committee with a report outlining its progress regarding the preventative maintenance of firearms. Additionally, that a final report be presented to the Committee.	31 December 2019 and 30 April 2020
Recommendation 5	The RCMP should provide the Committee with a report outlining its progress with regard to improving its management of acquisition projects, including ensuring that life-cycle requirements, such as training and maintenance, are addressed.	31 December 2019
Recommendation 6	The RCMP should provide the Committee with a report outlining the status of any information management systems pertaining to the tracking of inventory and distribution of carbines, pistols, and hard body armour, as well as tracking member certifications for their proper use.	31 December 2019