Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2015

[C/Supt Eric Slinn]

I'm optimistic.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Okay, we'll both be optimistic on that one.

I also want to ask about recommendation 2.48, which Mr. Albas asked about. That should exempt me from his relevancy police duties since I'm asking about the same thing.

In terms of justice delays, it talks about 15% of the delays for mutual legal assistance being under the justice department's control, and 30% for extradition being under justice department control, but as I read your response, your response seems to respond only to those where it was not in your control. Am I reading that correctly?

[Janet Henchey]

Thank you for that question.

I think you are reading that correctly on the basis that 15% of the delay is not an unreasonable amount of time. Just because we use the word “delay” doesn't mean it's unreasonable delay. In terms of 15% of the time taken to process a mutual legal assistance request, there has to be time involved in processing it. I believe the Auditor General—they can correct me if I'm wrong—felt that this was a reasonable amount of time.

With respect to the extradition aspect, 30% sounds like more, and it is, because extradition is a lot more legally cumbersome. It involves court proceedings and it involves a period where advice has to be provided to the Minister of Justice for him to make a decision with respect to whether to order surrender. That has defined timelines within the legislation. We are meeting the requirements of the defined timelines, and that would be the 30% time that we're using.

We're looking to all the other areas where, as was indicated earlier, we don't have direct control but where we may have some influence. We work regularly with a whole series of partners, treaty partners. By way of example, the countries that are making requests to us and to whom we're making requests are domestic partners like the RCMP, where we could continue to work to give more training. This a bit of a technical legal area, and it's very important to the RCMP in processing their investigations to get our assistance. Sometimes it's complicated and they don't always understand how to do it. We're working on having better training in order to assist them to make their requests more easily so that we'll be able to process them more effectively. In addition to that, we work with prosecution services across the country. Because there are so many different partners involved in this, it's sometimes difficult to control the whole time process.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

With regard to your 15% and 30% of the time, as you're characterizing it, would you say it's not a result of lack of resources but just part of the system?

[Janet Henchey]

Yes, I'd say it's part of the system.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca, BC]

Okay.

I'd like to go over to the Auditor General to see if that's the same understanding of delay and of the time taken up that Justice has just given us.

[Michael Ferguson]

I think what we identify is that, when you look at the whole amount of time required, Justice's portion of that time is 15% or 30%. When you look at the recommendation in paragraph 2.48, we say, “The Department of Justice Canada, in consultation with domestic and foreign partners, should assess the reasons for significant delays in processing requests...”.

I guess never let it be said that we let anybody off the hook from looking at efficiency in processes. Certainly more of the process is outside of what Justice does, so there may be greater opportunities for reductions in the time there. There may also be some efficiencies that could be had within Justice's processing as well.

We wouldn't say not to look at that, but I think the more fertile ground is probably outside the amount of time that Justice spends on it.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Time is our problem right now: it has expired. Thank you.

For our last member, we'll go back to Mr. Woodworth.

You have the floor, again, sir.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to begin—

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Pardon me.

Sorry, is there a problem?

[Alain Giguère, NDP, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Chair, the agenda says that the meeting will adjourn at 5:30 p.m.

In theory, then we can ask questions until 5:30 p.m. If the opposing party has no more questions to ask, I can assure you that the members on this side of the table can ask questions until 5:30 p.m. I would like us to follow the agenda and continue the meeting until 5:30 p.m.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

The usual practice of the committee is to complete one full rotation of our standard rotation slots. At the end of that, if there's time permitting, the committee....

It's in order for someone to make that request, to move that motion, but it will be decided by the committee, not by me. When we conclude this first round, I will have carried out what is expected of me as the chair, which is to take us through a full rotation. If there's time left over, then it's up to the committee, and I would entertain any motion that's in order.

With that, my apologies, Mr. Woodworth. You have the uninterrupted floor.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to ask Chief Superintendent Slinn to help me correct the record. I think when we conversed earlier, I was throwing out a hypothetical number of 20 liaison officers in Europe. In fact, it's more like eight or nine liaison officers in Europe. Is that correct?

[C/Supt Eric Slinn]

RCMP liaison officers?

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

That's correct.

[C/Supt Eric Slinn]

Correct. Yes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Very good. Thank you. I just didn't want to leave an incorrect impression with anyone listening.

I learned from the Auditor General's report that the last comprehensive evaluation by the RCMP of the liaison officer program was conducted in 2003, although shortly after the current government took office in 2006, it was followed in 2008 by the RCMP conducting a gap analysis to assess whether the allocation of liaison officers matched RCMP and government priorities.

I assume all of that is correct.

[C/Supt Eric Slinn]

That's correct.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I also learned from the Auditor General's report that even before the audit was complete, at some point in 2014 the RCMP began a new initiative to assess the performance of its international policing program and that the liaison officer program is part of the international policing program.

Is that correct?

[C/Supt Eric Slinn]

That's correct.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I am assuming that the assessment of the performance of the international policing program will encompass an assessment of the performance of the liaison officer program.

Is that correct?

[C/Supt Eric Slinn]

That is correct.

There are several facets to the RCMP's international program.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

That's what I thought, but today at least we'll just talk about the liaison officer program.

To make sure that we all understand the timeline, I understand from your RCMP management action plan in response to the audit that the force intends to have in place a performance management framework on or before March 31, 2016.

Is that correct?

[C/Supt Eric Slinn]

The completion would be 2018, but in 2016 we'll implement the performance management—

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

That's right.

That's actually the next point I was going to get to, that the performance management framework in place by March 31, 2016 will then tell you what data needs to be gathered to assess the performance under that framework.

Is that correct?