Public Accounts Committee on Sept. 7th, 2007

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

I don't want any headline tomorrow saying, “Day considers opening up all documents”.

I don't even know if there's a legal impediment, so I'm being very honest with you. I'm pleased with the process—I'm satisfied. I think it meets the demands of our getting to the bottom of things, and unless I see otherwise, this is the way the process should continue to unfold, in my view.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much, Mr. Christopherson.

Before we go to Mr. McGuinty, I just want to clarify a last remark. I don't want to leave any misunderstanding out there.

This committee does go in camera frequently, mostly to discuss committee reports and committee business. Any time we're hearing witnesses, it's extremely unlikely and highly unusual for us to go in camera. We have in the past. Perhaps in hindsight, it probably wasn't the thing to do. It's something that has happened, I believe, once or twice in the last seven years that I've been on the committee. So it's not something we would do in the committee.

But I have a question, Mr. Day, and I just want to get your thoughts on it. I guess it's something I wrestle with, and I don't know if I have any clear answers.

You are the responsible minister for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and in addition to that, you have a lot of other agencies dealing with national security. You have a very large and important portfolio. The protocol that has been followed for a long time now is that there is an arm's-length relationship between you and the law enforcement agencies. That has perhaps worked well, but when you see things get off the rails—and we've seen that in the Maher Arar inquiry, and we've seen it in this particular instance.... This tradition has been with us a long time and perhaps has served us well, but perhaps it's something we should review.

You have a lot of agencies under your responsibility. Do you have any thoughts on this going forward?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

That's a fair question, Chairman. It actually leads up to, and we may even get into a discussion of, the area of oversight in general—oversight of agencies, especially when it comes to the security, safety, intelligence-gathering agencies.

I want to see some changes in how that is done. I want to see it improved so that the minister isn't always totally responsible. I don't mind being responsible, but there's a shared carrying of that load. That's one of the things that the Brown task force, as you know, is going to be looking at in terms of possible change in governance structure. So I am very open to changes there.

I think that's been voiced around this committee. There have been recommendations from this committee to that effect, recommendations that I've also asked be taken into consideration as the Brown task force does its work. I will want to have, as any member of Parliament would, some input into what I think would not just be more effective oversight, but also oversight that has the appearance of being effective and is not tinged with partisanship or other things that might in any way detract from our capabilities to be the safest and most secure country in the world.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. McGuinty, seven minutes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Minister, thank you for coming.

I'll try to keep this on the up-and-up, Minister, although I have to admit to you that it's been very difficult. I think some of your comments here today have been cheap. I think that your penchant to play a blame game has been constant since you've been appointed to cabinet and since you arrived in government. For that matter, I think Mr. Poilievre, who worked for you for three years, has been well trained.

But I want to ask you this, having just had the author of the report in front of us tell us it cost $3.5 million and that he contracted his own or previous law firm to do $375,000 of work without RFPs, on the authority of the President of the Treasury Board. Did you know anything about that, first of all, and did you authorize it?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Anything to do with expenses related to this work had to go before Treasury Board and meet all Treasury Board guidelines. Many of those Treasury Board guidelines in place before this government arrived have actually been improved. The Federal Accountability Act, I think, is demonstrative of that, and it has in fact been hailed, even by our adversaries, as the toughest government accountability act we've seen in Canadian history. It was put in place by our government. So everything that was done, and had to be done, had to meet Treasury Board guidelines. And that is my instruction when it comes to the accommodation of work, when it comes to secretariat support, and when it comes to the pretty significant expertise required: it has to meet Treasury Board guidelines.

I just have to say also—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

So you know nothing about that?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Perhaps I could finish, David, as I allowed you to speak at length.

I have to say, David, that when I opened my comments—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

It's Mr. McGuinty.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

—I made a point, first of all, of not taking any committee time. I wanted your questions and your advice. I did not stray into areas of partisanship. The first round of questioning—fair enough, as this is an open session with freedom of speech—was very partisan.

I reflected on the fact that it happened under another regime.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Minister, could we just go back to the questions for a second? This is a well-worn technique.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

I want to close with this thought—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Do you have any knowledge—

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Let the minister finish, and then we're going to go to you, Mr. McGuinty.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I wish he would.

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Thank you.

I just want to make the clarification that I have not entered this discussion today in a partisan way. I've said we want to get a system that meets the safety and security needs of our country. I'm saying that to take issue with how you characterized my response to a very partisan opening from your colleague, which he's free to do, but I will respond in kind, just to keep the record straight.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Minister, how much will it cost to conduct a task force?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

We don't have a definite figure on that. We want to make sure there's no serious limitation to the ability of the task force to hear from individuals, from groups. This task force could lead to what would be the most significant changes in the governance structure of the RCMP possibly in its lifetime. We want to make sure that they're able to get it right.

As I said, anything they want to do, any expenses, must go before the Treasury Board. If you have some suggestions on curtailing costs or keeping within a certain limit, I'd certainly be interested to hear those.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

If the task force reports, Minister, that there ought to be a public inquiry here, will you appoint, create, and fund a public inquiry?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

It's hypothetical, but I would be in a pretty tough position politically if that task force came out saying they can't do the work, that there has to be a public inquiry. I think I would be under a lot of pressure to give that fair consideration. It's hypothetical, but that's my reflection at this point.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Do you believe the way in which the task force is going to conduct its affairs, i.e., with most of the interviews conducted behind closed doors...? You've read this report presumably, right?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Yes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

This report is rife with references to secrecy, lack of transparency, fear, and all kinds of challenges inside the culture of the organization. Do you think it's appropriate that the task force you've struck and are now funding conduct almost all of its deliberations privately?

[Stockwell Day, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

I do, and for this reason: you're asking people to come forward. As with the last piece of work that was done, similarly with this one, there are going to be cases where people are going to be coming forward, and they're going to be using real-life examples of where they feel their management has failed them or where they feel the structure has failed them.

As with many similar bodies, when you are asking information from individuals that at least they fear could be used against them by others who might not be, let's say, as liberal in their feelings of seeing improvements, then unless you can guarantee them some level of confidence, you limit the ability to have people really coming forward and saying, “Here are some changes we need.” Presumably, then, at that task force those members would say, “Well, why do you think we need that change?” Then they're going to be talking about individuals with whom they work. They're going to be talking about things that could affect promotions, their careers. Allowing that type of confidence to exist in a period of questioning, I think, for these purposes is vital.

It appears we have a disagreement on that, David, but I think it's important that this kind of confidence is there for some of the individuals to come forward. There are also going to be people coming forward representing labour positions on many issues and differences in structure. Again, whether on the corporate side, whether on the labour side, whether on the legislative side, or whether it's just people who are going to be talking about their work environment, they need to be able to do that in confidence.

The thing about this task force being independent is not that they have anything to hide. As a matter of fact, they want to find out what people are afraid of talking about and make their recommendations based on that. We appear to have a disagreement on that, and I respect that.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Minister, what is the status of the OPP investigation of this matter?