Public Accounts Committee on Sept. 7th, 2007

[Commr William Elliott]

I'd be happy to do that, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Lake, you have four minutes.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I want to walk through this in terms of what happened. I want to be comfortable that if this were to happen again, things would be handled differently.

Taking a look at the order of things, we have Ms. Revine fulfilling her responsibilities. She is charged with this A-base review, and in the course of her work she finds a problem. She takes it to her direct supervisor, Chief Superintendent Macaulay. He advises the ethics commissioner. It seems that these are reasonable things to do. The staff relations representative, Staff Sergeant Lewis, gets involved and informs the commissioner that there's a problem. It seems that internally they're doing all of the things they should have done.

Nothing happens, so finally they go to what they see as their last resort. In February 2004, Staff Sergeant Lewis actually writes a letter to the President of the Treasury Board, the minister responsible for the RCMP—at the time, it would have been Anne McLellan—and the Auditor General with respect to the pension plan matters. In the letter he states that Commissioner Zaccardelli had failed “to meet his obligations under the RCMP Act and as our leader, in relation to serious accusations of wrongdoing by senior managers...”. He has basically gone everywhere he can go and done everything internal that he can do—they all have—and nothing happens. They finally go to the minister. It seems that the minister is as high as it gets, the absolute last resort.

I know there are other mechanisms in place now, but going back, what more could they have done? If you were the commissioner at the time, what would you expect the minister to do in that situation?

[Commr William Elliott]

I'm not sure I can answer that question.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

What would you expect your minister to do now? You're in the position of commissioner now. Would you expect that a minister would take action at that point? The commissioner is not acting, and their whole frustration centres on the fact that the commissioner is doing nothing. So the minister's action at the time was to have a meeting with the commissioner. The commissioner says it's all okay, and the minister just goes on her way, trusting that everything's going to be fine. But the whole problem centred around the commissioner at the time.

What more were they to do?

[Commr William Elliott]

As I said, I don't have an answer with respect to what more they could do. With respect to the minister, I guess the only comment I would make is that the RCMP Act provides that the minister can give direction to the commissioner.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Okay.

I want to talk a little further to what Mr. Sweet was saying and ask the question in terms of the situation and, if it were to happen today, what would happen differently. Again, maybe speak a little further to the structural mechanisms that would ensure that they would get a fair hearing now. Outside of a commissioner who happens to be a good listener, what assurance do they have that they're going to get a hearing and their careers aren't going to be ended now, going forward, if this were to happen today?

[Commr William Elliott]

We have legislation passed by the Government of Canada to provide protection to those who come forward with information or allegations of impropriety. We have the creation of the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner. Internal to the RCMP, there is what I guess I would describe as informal reinvigoration of the role of the ethics adviser, but I think up to this point nothing further formally has been put in place. I think that is a shortcoming and I think that it should be addressed. One of the things we are examining in the course of our work in support of the task force is what those mechanisms might be.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I know my colleague Mr. Sweet has a question that I think is important, so I'm going to pass it on to him.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

In Ms. Duxbury's study, on page 6, under “Objective Three: Recruitment and Retention”, there's a really glaring concern. I would like to ask you about whether you're specifically trying to handle this for the future. It states:

Two thirds of this sample (90% of those in the Sergeant/Staff Sergeant and Inspector and above groups) say they plan on leaving the RCMP in the next several years. These data suggest that the RCMP will likely have a succession planning problem in the near future.

I was just wondering if you were aware of that, that this exodus may be coming, and if you have some action that's going to be taken to make sure there's a recruitment initiative so that the ranks aren't thin.

[Commr William Elliott]

Certainly the RCMP has had a demographic challenge for a number of years, like other departments and agencies of the federal government. The intake was very limited. We have taken concrete steps to increase our recruitment. Significant investments have been made in the training academy in Regina. We will graduate more recruits this year than we have in any of the recent previous years.

Having said that, we are having some challenges meeting our targets with respect to recruiting. We're recruiting more recruits, but we are not recruiting as many as we need, and we need to make more efforts. We are in the process of taking steps to do that and examining ways that we can do better. For example, I don't remember the exact number, but I think it's around 20 individuals whose full-time occupation is to do proactive recruiting, and that is certainly paying some successes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Mr. Elliott.

That concludes, colleagues, round two.

I have a question for Ms. Duxbury.

I understand one of your emphases is on change management. You've heard the testimony today; obviously you're following this issue. In your opinion, what is required here?

[Prof. Linda Duxbury]

I teach the PhD class in managing change. I teach the MBA class. I think that if you looked at my report, the RCMP is definitely not change ready. The biggest issue, of course, is a lack of trust and a real doubt that the RCMP is actually going to stick to it this time.

The RCMP, like a lot of public servants, like a lot of other people, are change weary. They've had a lot of changes thrust on them in the last several decades, but very little follow-through.

My advice is, first of all, don't go in there expecting to change the world immediately. You have to build credibility. You have to build trust. You build credibility and trust not by what you say but by what you do. I think it's very important in the next six months to actually show that things will be slightly different, that there is a respect.

In fact I think the accountability frameworks need to be changed. There has been a real recognition that changing policies is a necessary first step, as is changing structures, but it will do no good if the culture remains one of policy and not practice.

I really think we need to recognize that this is an incredibly difficult task that—I did call him Bill as well, I'm sorry to say, but I'm an academic and inappropriate anyway. I think it's very important to recognize that while dramatic action is needed, there's a real risk. I would say that right now the majority of RCMP are sitting on the fence and saying “let's see what happens, not what they say but what they do”.

I emphasize that as being important.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

I want to thank you for those comments.

Monsieur Laforest.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Thank you for giving me the floor, Mr. Chair. I will be very brief.

On a number of occasions, I have expressed the desire to have a public inquiry in order to shed light on everything that has happened in the RCMP. After hearing Ms. Duxbury's evidence today, in which she told us how difficult it is given the considerable resistance to change, and Mr. Elliott's who hides behind state secrets and national security in order to avoid answering questions, even in the Maher Arar case where we know that national security was not an issue and is a complete red herring, I want, on behalf of the Bloc Québécois, to demand a public inquiry in the clearest terms so that the people of Quebec and of Canada can find out what is happening and so that real changes can be made.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much.

I'm going to invite you to make closing comments, Mr. Elliott.

That concludes the meeting, colleagues. Before we do adjourn, though, I'm going to invite Ms. Duxbury, former Commissioner Busson, and Commissioner Elliott to make any closing comments that they see appropriate.

Commissioner Elliott, I understand you do have a closing comment.

[Commr William Elliott]

Mr. Chairman, I just want to begin by saying I take exception to the honourable member's comments accusing me of hiding behind things. In my role as a public servant, I had an obligation to the governments that I served to provide frank, confidential advice. It is not appropriate for me to reveal that advice.

With respect to the specific issue about national security issues and confidentiality, I point out for the record that the Federal Court of Canada determined that a number of the things that were redacted were in fact redacted appropriately.

With respect to the issues that we came to discuss today, Mr. Chairman, I just want to reinforce that I'm very honoured to be Commissioner of the RCMP. The RCMP is made up of thousands of women and men who provide exemplary service to Canadians. There are certainly shortcomings. I would say that there are more than a few weaknesses that we have to address, but even having said that, I would say that there is far more positive than negative about the RCMP. There is far more right about the RCMP than there are areas that need improvement. The areas that need improvement are numerous and they are very significant, and I am committed to do my best to work with the organization, to work with the task force, to work with the minister, to work with the government and parliamentarians to bring those improvements that are necessary and that the RCMP requires and that Canadians also require.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Commissioner Elliott.

Do you have any closing remarks, former Commissioner Busson?

[Beverley A. Busson]

Thank you very much.

I want to thank the committee for the kind comments they made about my leadership.

And I would echo what Commissioner Elliot said. I do believe that leadership does matter. And in this organization, that change, as Mr. Lake said, will not be easy and it will not be immediate. I do believe that leadership from the top and the kinds of changes and the kinds of initiatives and the kind of trust this organization is building from the top down and from the bottom up with the people of Canada is a very important step forward. Senior management in this organization exists to support the courage and the amazing work that gets done in the field every day. And I believe that the message from the top, as Ms. Duxbury said, reinforced over and over again by actions, will again build that trust both among the membership and among the public. There is amazing work to be done every day. It is dangerous work, and the safety of the country is at stake.

I want to thank the committee. It has been a true privilege to have served for over thirty-two and a half years and a real honour to have been commissioner for the short time I was. I want to thank the committee for its support in moving the force forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Ms. Busson.

Ms. Duxbury, have you any final comments?

[Prof. Linda Duxbury]

Yes. I want to provide a word of caution to this committee.

Cultural change is the most difficult kind of change. The majority of cultural changes fail. We know that even if all the stars are aligned, it takes five to ten years for cultural change to occur. And not all the stars are aligned here, so I would just caution the committee that we have to give the RCMP a chance here. We can't expect miracles and overnight things to happen.

The other thing is that leadership does matter, especially with respect to cultural change, because the leader sets the culture by his or her own behaviour. The leader also has access to the resources and the levers needed for this kind of change, such as changing the accountability framework, changing reward structures, and so on.

I also want to say that leadership is not positional. To be a leader you have to have followers, and I think we have to make that distinction. There can be leaders from every level of the organization. It is going to be a significant challenge, and I wish them luck.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you, Ms. Duxbury.

Just to conclude, I want to thank you, Commissioner Elliott, for being here today. You've taken on a very difficult and challenging job. Everyone here on the committee certainly wishes you all the best. I certainly want to echo your comments about the 17,000 members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who are serving Canadians every day and every night. The studies that we're doing really reflect on that top echelon and do not in any way reflect on the tremendous job that the members of your force are doing currently.

Again, Ms. Busson, I want to echo the comments that were made previously. You've had a stellar career with the RCMP. You have been before this committee four or five times on this particular issue, and we certainly want to thank you very much for your help and assistance.

Ms. Duxbury, again I want to thank you. Your report will be invaluable to the committee as we move forward on this particular issue.

Having said that, colleagues, I'm going to pause. I remind members that we will take a 10-minute break and then we'll come back in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]

[Public proceedings resume]

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

At this point in time I call the meeting to order. I want to welcome everyone back to this session of today's meetings. This meeting will last one hour, colleagues, and we have one witness before us, Mr. David A. Brown.

Mr. Brown was the independent investigator appointed by the public safety minister earlier in the year to report on some of the issues surrounding the insurance and pension funds of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Mr. Brown did report to the minister on June 15. That report is public, and I believe all members have a copy. He's also been appointed to chair a task force to deal with governance structures regarding the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. That task force has been under way for about six weeks. It is served by four other members besides him, and their mandate is to report by the end of the year, by December 31.

Mr. Brown, I want to welcome you to the committee. I thank you for coming. First of all, do you have any opening comments or remarks you wish to make?

[David Brown, Independent Investigator into RCMP Pension and Insurance Matters, Office of the Independent Investigator into RCMP Pension and Insurance Matters]

No, I don't, thank you, Chair. I'm aware that many people coming before you do start with opening comments. As I thought about what I might say to you, I couldn't really think of anything you didn't already know. Rather than summarize things in my report, which would have been a waste of your time, I thought we would simply launch into it and I would be prepared to take your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Okay. First we're going to have one round, seven minutes each.

Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.

I should remind members, too, that there are some pictures being taken by a House of Commons photographer. He's not one of the local media, so he's certainly welcome to stay and take pictures.

Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.